THE  LIBRARY 

OF 

THE  UNIVERSITY 

OF  CALIFORNIA 

LOS  ANGELES 


What  is  Socialism? 

An  Exposition  and  a  Criticism 

With    Special  Reference    to   the   Movement    in 
America  and  England 


BY 


JAMES     BOYLE 

Private  Secretary  of  Gov.  Wm.  McKinley;    former  Consul  of  the  United 

States  at  Liverpool,  Eng. 

Author  of  "The  Initiative  and  Referendum,"  "Organized  Labor 
and  Court  Decisions,"  "The  New  Socialism,"  etc. 


THE  SHAKESPEARE  PRESS 
114-116  E.  28th  Street 

NEW    YORK 
1912 


Copyright,  1912, 

BY 

James  Boyle. 


7 


U/ 


I  dedicate  this  book  to 

v&v  mat, 

Whose  patience  and  encouragement  have   been   of 
immeasurable  value  to  me  in  my  studies. 


1524948 


"Socialism  is  so  vague  and  contradictory  that  it  cannot 
stand  argument.  Its  very  vagueness  commends  it  to 
men  who  will  not  or  cannot  take  the  trouble  to  think, 
but  in  the  long  run  the  men  who  do  think  will  win,  if 
the  discussion  is  only  kept  up." — Henry  George,  in  let- 
ter to  the  Editor  of  the  Financial  Reform  Almanac,  Liv- 
erpool, Eng. 

"Class  war  is  murder;  class  war  is  fratricide;  class 
war  is  suicide." — Charles  Bradlaugh  (the  English 
Radical),  in  his  debate  with  H.  M.  Hyndman,  the  leader 
of  British  Marxian  Socialism. 

"1  want  to  tell  you  Socialists  that  .  .  .  econom- 
ically, you  are  unsound ;  socially,  you  are  wrong ;  indus- 
trially, you  are  an  impossibility." — Samuel  Gompers, 
President  of  the  American  Federation  of  Labor,  at  the 
annual  meeting,  at  Boston,  1903. 


CONTENTS 


FOREWORD 


PAGE 
13 


CHAPTER    I 

INTRODUCTION 

Two  Remarkable  Pronouncements 
Socialism   in   England    . 
Relation  to  Religion  and  Morality 
Variations  and  Agreements  . 

In  America 

Is    Revolution    Imminent?    . 

Labor    and    Socialism 

Developments  in  America      . 

Socialism  Already  Here! 

Robert  Owen,  the  Father  of  Modern  Socialism 


IS 

15 
15 
17 
20 

22 
24 
25 
26 
29 
30 


CHAPTER    II 


WHAT  IS  SOCIALISM?      . 

Origin  of  the  Word  "Socialism"   . 

Definitions 

What  is  "Orthodox"  Socialism? 
Not  Anarchism,  nor  Communism 
Division  of  Labor's    Products 


34 

34 
34 
39 
42 

45 


CHAPTER    III 

IN    ANCIENT    DAYS    .... 

Aboriginal  Communism  . 

The  Family  and  Private  Property 


49 
•19 
50 


8 


CONTENTS 


Examples  of  Ancient  Socialism 54 

Athenian  Socialism 55 

The   "Solonic    Law" 57 

In   Peru,   Mexico  and   Elsewhere        ....  59 


CHAPTER    IV 


LABOR'S    ATTITUDE  .... 

Trade  Unionism  versus  Socialism 
British  Politics  and  Trade  Unionism 
The  "Taff  Vale  Decision"    . 
Labor  Revolt,  August,  191 1     . 
American    Political-Labor    Movement 
The  Federation  of  Labor  and  Socialism 
Socialist  Criticism  of  the  Federation 


64 
64 
65 
69 
72 

75 
78 
83 


CHAPTER    V 

UTOPIANISM 86 

Utopian  Romances     .        .  86 

Experimental  Utopianism 90 

Secular   Societies 92 

Sectarian  Communism 97 


CHAPTER    VI 

STATE  AND  MUNICIPAL  SOCIALISM 

Bismarck  and  State  Socialism     . 

German  Workmen's   Insurance  and  Old  Age 

sions 

State  Socialism   Defined        .... 
State  Socialism  Through   Tan  inc.  the  Rich 
British  Old-Age  Pension  Scheme 
Where  the  Money  Comes  From    . 
American   State  Socialism    .... 

Munti  tPAL   Socialism 

A  Costly  Experiment 


Pen 


102 
102 

103 
104 
106 
107 
109 
in 
114 
116 


CONTENTS 


CHAPTER    VII 


CHRISTIAN   SOCIALISM 

The    Churches    and    Christian    Socialism 
The  Movement  in   England  .... 
American  Christian   Socialism     . 
Continental  Christian  Socialism 


121 

121 
123 
127 
130 


CHAPTER   VIII 

MARXIAN    SOCIALISM U5 

The  Fundamentals J3S 

Marx's   "Capital" *37 

The  Marxian  Theory  of  Values               .        .  141 

"Surplus  Value"      . '45 

Capitalism I47 

Collectivism T49 

The  "Industrial  Revolution" T5° 

How   Will    Collectivism    be    Established?        .        .  154 

The  Co-operative  Commonwealth        .        .        .  159 

Socialism   as  Affecting  Religion   and  the  Family  161 

Socialism  Involves  Ethics  as  Well  as   Economics  166 
Wages  and  Distribution  of  Products  .        .        .        .17° 

CHAPTER    IX 


SOCIALISM    IN    AMERICA 

Backwardism   of   American    Socialism 
The  "International"  and  American  Socialists 
The  "International"  Transferred  to  New  York 
The  Socialist  Labor  Party    .... 

The  Socialist  Party 

Anarchism  in  America 

The   Moyer-TIaywood   Murder   Case    . 
The   McNamara    Outrages    .... 
Present  Outlook 


176 
176 

1/9 
182 

183 
186 
192 
197 
199 
200 


IO 


CONTENTS 


CHAPTER   X 


BRITISH    SOCIALISM 

The  Most  Active  Force  in  England 
Characteristics         .... 
Socialism  Essentially   English  in  Origin 
John  Ball,  the  First  English  Socialist 
The  "Industrial  Revolution"  in   Englan 
The   "Luddites"         .... 
The  "Chartists"       .... 
The  "International"  in  England 
The  Social  Democratic   Federation 

"Fabianism" 

The   Independent   Labor   Party    . 
The  Labor    Party    .... 
Socialism  Submerges  Trade  Unionism 
Has  Socialism  Been  Halted? 
The    Anti-Socialist    Movement    . 


203 

203 
204 
207 
210 
213 

215 

217 
223 
227 
236 

239 

244 

248 
252 
256 


CHAPTER    XI 


CONTINENTAL    SOCIALISM 260 

In   Germany 260 

.Modification   of   German   Socialism    .        .                .  268 

French    Socialism 275 

The  Movement  in  Austria 279 

Italian   Socialism 282 

Russia's  Revolutionary  Socialism        ....  284 

Belgian   Socialism 291 

Socialism    in    Holland 294 

In    Switzerland 296 

In   Denmark 3°o 

In    Norway 302 

In   Sweden 3°3 

Spain   and  Porti  gaj 305 


CONTENTS  ii 

CHAPTER    XII 

THE    NEW    "INTERNATIONAL" 307 

Numerical  Strength  of  Socialism        ....  310 

CHAPTER    XIII 

CONCLUSION:    A    CRITICISM 314 

INDEX 333 


FOREWORD 

While  making  some  Consular  investigations  of  the 
municipal  ownership  and  operation  of  certain  "public 
utilities"  in  Great  Britain  some  years  ago,  the  writer 
was  attracted  to  the  study  of  the  entire  range  of  Social- 
ism. He  can  truly  say  that  he  approached  and  fol- 
lowed up  the  subject  with  an  open  and  receptive  mind. 
It  is  a  boast  of  Socialists  that  no  student  can  make  an 
impartial  examination  of  Collectivism  without  becoming 
an  adherent  at  heart,  even  though  he  may  never  formally 
enroll  himself  as  a  "comrade."  That  has  not  been  so  in 
the  case  of  the  author.  Profoundly  impressed  as  he  is 
with  the  idealism  of  the  movement,  and  fully  apprecia- 
tive of  the  beneficence  and  sound  policy  of  many  of  the 
State's  activities  in  spheres  formerly  reserved  for  indi- 
vidual enterprise,  yet  he  has  become  firmly  convinced 
that  so-called  Scientific  or  Modern  Socialism — in  its 
ultimate  aim — is  both  ethically  wrong  and  economically 
unsound  and  impracticable.  He  is  confident  in  his  own 
mind  that  an  actual  Collectivist  Commonwealth  would 
be  a  tragic  failure ;  and  he  is  also  confident  that  the 
establishment  of  such  a  State — even  as  an  experiment 
— is  an  impossibility  within  any  measurable  distance  of 
time — at  any  rate  in  America. 

Of  books  on  Socialism  there  are  many;  but  almost 
without  exception  they  are  either  too  technical  for  the 
average  reader  or  are  distinctly  one-sided.     The  aim  of 

13 


14  FOREWORD 

the  author  has  been  to  present  a  popular  and  impartial 
exposition  of  the  different  schools  and  phases  of  Social- 
ism, according  to  the  recognized  authorities;  and  he 
has  endeavored  to  fairly  and  adequately  state  all  propo- 
sitions and  arguments  even  though  he  might  rad- 
ically dissent  therefrom.  He  has  not  intentionally  mis- 
quoted or  misrepresented  any  individual  or  school  of 
thought. 


WHAT    IS   SOCIALISM? 


CHAPTER    I 

INTRODUCTION 

Two  Remarkable  Pronouncements. 

Within  recent  years  there  have  been  remarkable  pro- 
nouncements on  Socialism  by  two  famous  men,  who 
are  representatives  of  the  highest  types  of  American 
and  British  citizenship — Ex-President  Roosevelt  and 
Ex-Premier  Rosebery.  Both  vehemently  denounced 
Modern  Socialism.  The  pronouncement  by  Lord  Rose- 
bery was  in  a  speech  delivered  at  London,  on  March 
12,  1908,  he  declaring  that  "Socialism  is  the  end  of  all 
— Empire,  religious  faith,  freedom,  property ;  Social- 
ism is  the  death-blow  to  all !"  And  since  then  he  has 
repeated  and  amplified  this  declaration. 

Socialism  in  England. 

Lord  Rosebery's  view  is  certainly  shared  by  the  vast 
majority  of  British  subjects,  who  have  a  traditional 
horror  of  French  Revolutionary  Communism,  with 
which  Socialism  has  been  associated  in  the  popular  mind 
in  the  past.  But  time  has  wrought  ominous  changes; 
and  within  the  last  decade  there  has  been  an  amazing 

15 


16  WHAT   IS    SOCIALISM? 

growth  of  Socialism  in  England.  It  is  only  within  the 
last  few  years  that  the  British  public  have  come  to  a 
full  realization  of  the  extent  of  the  development  of 
Socialism — this  development  being  at  first  by  a  silent, 
unobtrusive,  permeative,  and  almost  stealthy  Fabian 
process,  but  latterly  by  an  open  and  defiant  militant 
campaign,  already  boastfully  confident  of  complete  suc- 
cess. Thoughtful  students  of  the  times  now  recognize 
that  the  coming,  if  not  the  imminent,  issue  in  England 
is  not  that  of  Tariff  Reform,  Home  Rule,  Female  Suf- 
frage, the  Abolishment  of  the  House  of  Lords,  the  Dis- 
establishment of  the  Church — but  Socialism !  Having 
become  alarmed,  the  British  public  are  taking  steps  to 
meet  the  issue.  Heretofore,  Socialism  has  had  the  field 
practically  to  itself  in  England ;  but  now,  for  the  first 
time  in  its  history,  it  is  confronted  with  intelligent  and 
organized  opposition.  The  gigantic  struggle  which  has 
commenced  in  Britain  will  be  watched  with  absorbing 
interest  on  this  side  of  the  Atlantic.  The  tendency  of 
much  of  the  recent  British  legislation  in  response  to 
demands  of  Labor-Socialists,  must  inevitably  have  a 
pauperizing  influence  upon  the  working  people.  Such 
virtues  as  self-help,  thrift,  personal  independence,  and 
individual  initiative — and  even  national  patriotism — are 
now  openly  laughed  to  scorn  by  many  British  Socialists 
as  out  of  date.  Not  only  in  the  creation  of  sentiment 
among  the  working  people  has  the  spirit  of  Socialism 
made  tremendous  progress  in  England  during  the  last 
ten  years,  but  in  actual  legislation,  both  national  and 
i.  Nevertheless,  that  Socialism  in  its  quintessence, 
that  is.  Collectivism  (the  public  ownership  and  control 
of  the  means  of  production,  distribution  and  exchange), 
will   be   adopted  by  the   British   people,   is   unthinkable. 


INTRODUCTION  17 

As  the  greatest  of  all  American  economic  Radicals, 
Henry  George,  wrote  to  an  English  editor :  "Socialism 
is  so  vague  and  contradictory  that  it  cannot  stand  argu- 
ment. Its  very  vagueness  commends  it  to  men  who  will 
not  or  cannot  take  the  trouble  to  think,  but  in  the  long 
run  the  men  who  do  think  will  win,  if  the  discussion  is 
only  kept  up." 

It  can  reasonably  be  expected  that  the  critical  dis- 
cussion and  organized  opposition  against  which  British 
Socialism  has  now  to  contend,  will  finally  win  the  day, 
although  nothing  can  stop  the  progress  of  practical 
ameliorative  legislation.  But,  in  the  meanwhile,  organ- 
ized Labor  has  "cast  the  die" ;  and  before  it  realizes 
that  it  has  made  a  colossal  blunder  in  surrendering  itself 
to  Socialism — before  it  is  compelled  by  hard  inexorable 
facts  to  understand  that  the  "ultimate  aim"  of  Socialism 
is  wildly  extravagant,  destructively  inconoclastic,  and 
absolutely  impracticable — there  will  probably  be  bitter 
times  in  the  old  Mother  Land.  Indeed,  there  have 
already  been  bitter  times — in  the  unexampled  Labor- 
Socialist  outbreaks  of  191 1. 

Relation  to  Religion  and  Morality. 

Ex-President  Roosevelt's  pronouncement  against  So- 
cialism appeared  as  an  editorial  in  The  Outlook  (New 
York),  March  20,  1909,  and  was  his  parting  message 
to  his  fellow-countrymen  before  he  went  on  his  African 
hunting  expedition.  Here  is  a  sample  sentence  in  Mr. 
Roosevelt's  editorial : 

The  doctrinaire  Socialists,  the  extremists,  the  men  who 
represent  the  doctrine  in  its  most  advanced  form,  are,  and 
must  necessarily  be,  not  only  convinced  opponents  of  private 
property,  but  also  bitterly  hostile  to  all  religion  and  morality ; 


18  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

in  short,  they  must  be  opposed  to  all  those  principles  through 
which  alone,  even  an  imperfect  civilization  can  be  built  up 
by  slow  advances  through  the  ages. 

When  Ex-President  Roosevelt  wrote  this  fierce  de- 
nunciation of  Modern  Socialism  he  was  the  voluntary 
spokesman  of  the  vast  majority  of  his  fellow-country- 
men. His  condemnation  is  quite  natural  as  coming 
from  a  sturdy  Individualist,  a  vigorous  thinker,  a  fam- 
ily man  with  old-fashioned  ideas  of  morals,  and  a  con- 
servative in  religious  matters,  whose  conception  of  the 
Marxian  theory  is  based  on  the  writings  and  speeches 
of  a  certain  group  or  school,  which,  it  might  be 
remarked,  arrogates  to  itself  the  exclusive  possession  of 
"orthodoxy." 

Still,  there  are  many  Socialists  whose  views  most  cer- 
tainly cannot  be  stigmatized  as  immoral.  They  look 
upon  the  ultimate  goal  of  Socialism,  the  Co-operative 
Commonwealth,  as  purely  a  political,  an  industrial  and 
an  economic  condition  of  society,  and  deny  that  it  would 
have  any  bearing  upon  religion  or  morals,  except  as 
improved  environments  naturally  have  a  tendency  to 
raise  the  social  and  ethical  status  of  the  human  race ; 
and,  at  any  rate,  they  claim,  morals  and  religion  would 
be  exclusively  a  private  matter,  under  Socialism.  This 
is  the  general  professed  public  position  of  present-day 
organized  Socialism  in  the  United  States,  Great  Britain, 
and  Germany. 

But  it  can  well  be  protested  that  these  professions 
and  pleadings  are  out  of  harmony  with  doctrines  laid 
down  by  nearly  all  of  the  brainiest  and  most  logically 
consistent  of  the  exponents  of  what  is  generally  recog- 
nized as  orthodox  Socialism.  The  logical  application  of 
the  theories  of  Marxism   precludes   the   pre-determina- 


INTRODUCTION  19 

tion,  by  conscious  individual  choice  or  concerted  reso- 
lution, of  the  relation  of  the  Co-operative  Common- 
wealth toward  morals  or  religion,  or  any  of  the  ethical, 
social,  or  even  political  phases  of  public  or  private  life. 
Orthodox  Marxism  asserts  that  the  entire  sociological 
and  political  structure  can  only  take  form  as  the  logical 
outcome  of  a  definite  process  of  historical  development, 
based  upon  the  economic  system  prevailing  at  the  time. 
Hence,  the  attitude  of  Socialism  toward  morality,  the 
family,  or  religion,  and  the  probable  result  of  the  appli- 
cation of  Socialistic  theories  thereon,  are  to  be  judged 
not  by  the  declarations  or  protests  of  individual  Social- 
ists, nor  even  of  international  or  national  Socialist  con- 
gresses,— seeking  votes — but  by  the  general  philosophy 
and  tendency  of  the  movement,  and  there  is  no  mistak- 
ing that  philosophy  and  tendency,  either  from  observa- 
tion and  study  or  from  the  declarations  of  the  founders 
and  conceded  leaders  of  the  movement. 

The  doctrine  of  the  materialistic  propulsive  force  of 
Socialism, — almost  Oriental  fatalism — as  expounded  by 
all  the  acknowledged  orthodox  followers  of  Marx,  is  not 
neutralized  by  the  later  expositions  of  amiable  "trim- 
mers," who  seek  to  reconcile  Modern  Socialism  with 
firmly-grounded   and   tested   economies  and   ethics. 

It  is  a  noteworthy  fact  that  in  the  English  elections 
of  1909  the  partial  reversals  of  the  astounding  Socialist 
triumphs  of  1906  were  largely  the  result  of  the  expose 
of  the  real  position  of  Marxism  in  relation  to  religion 
and  ethics.  As  early  as  1894  Prof.  Ely  had  foreseen 
what  has  been  the  greatest  stumbling-block  to  the  exten- 
sive and  permanent  development  of  Modern  Socialism 
in  English-speaking  countries,  for  in  the  first  edition 
(issued  in   the   year  named)    of  Socialism  and  Social 


20  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

Reform,  he  says:  "Socialism  in  England  and  America 
can  be  appreciated  in  its  full  strength  only  when  it  be- 
comes entirely  emancipated  from  the  materialistic  con- 
ception of  history  advanced  by  Karl  Marx ;  for  in 
neither  country  can  Socialism  meet  with  favor  when  it 
finds  its  basis  in  materialism."  This  is  also  the  position 
of  Kirkup,  the  English  advocate  of  a  "purified"  Social- 
ism ;  but  it  is  also  the  position  which  is  bitterly  resented 
by  the  greatest  advocates  of  Modern  Socialism,  living 
and  dead. 

Variations  and  Agreements. 

The  student  is  confronted  with  the  fact  that  there  are 
a  variety  of  schools  of  Socialism ;  and  he  cannot  fail 
to  notice  that  some  members  of  certain  schools  are  as 
intolerant  toward  other  schools  as  some  "religionists" 
are  with  respect  to  members  of  other  sects.  It  is  the 
fashion  of  many  Socialist  writers  to  adopt  toward  oppo- 
nents either  a  lofty  air  of  intellectual  superiority, 
amounting  to  contemptuous  patronage,  or  else  a  tone 
of  abuse.  They  are  impatient  with  disputants,  and  seem 
almost  amazedly  indignant  that  anybody  should  be  so 
ignorantly  presumptuous  as  to  dare  to  question  their 
assertions  and  deductions.  When  no  other  argument  is 
handy,  there  is  always  the  claim  that  the  non-Socialist 
does  not  understand  Socialism.  This  is  especially  true 
of  those  who  proudly  give  the  prefix  "Marxian"  to  their 
particular  brand.  American  Socialists  are  among  the 
worst  offenders  in  this  regard.  Most  of  the  American 
Socialist  journals  are  distinguished  for  abusiveness,  and 
but  few  of  them  are  worthy  of  perusal  as  exponents  of 
a  world  wide  movement.  It  is  quite  in  the  order  of 
things    for   Socialists   to   say   that   Mr.   Roosevelt   does 


INTRODUCTION  21 

not  understand  Socialism ;  but  he  certainly  has  a  knowl- 
edge of  one  kind.  A  leading-  representative  of  another 
variety,  Bernard  Shaw,  the  English  Fabian,  asserts 
that  some  of  the  self-styled  Marxians  are  not  fully  read 
up  in  and  probably  could  not  understand  the  writings  of 
Karl  Marx,  the  arch-priest  of  Modern  Socialism.  And 
Bernard  Shaw  is  probably  correct.  Kautsky,  the  Ger- 
man editor,  is  still  hard  at  it  issuing  further  volumes  of 
Das  Kapital,  but  there  are  probably  very  few  men, 
either  in  America  or  England,  who  have  read  the  entire 
half-dozen  volumes  forming  the  complete  stupendous 
work,  the  notes  of  which  (excluding  the  first  volume) 
were  turned  over  to  Engels  for  compilation  after  the 
death  of  Marx,  Kautsky  taking  up  the  work  after  the 
death  of  the  former. 

Yet,  there  is  one  central  point,  one  cardinal  doctrine, 
as  to  which  practically  all  Socialists,  of  all  schools,  are 
agreed,  as  an  abstract  proposition,  and  that  is  the  col- 
lective ownership  and  control  of  the  means  of  produc- 
tion, distribution  and  exchange,  which  can  be  operated 
"socially,"  for  the  equitable  good  of  all.  At  first  sight 
it  would  appear  that  an  agreement  upon  this  point — 
even  though  the  agreement  be  only  of  a  general  nature 
— is  sufficient  reply  to  the  charge  that  there  are  differ- 
ent and  conflicting  kinds  of  Socialism ;  but  upon  investi- 
gation it  will  be  found  that  there  are  a  number  of  rad- 
ical differences  growing  out  of  not  only  the  interpreta- 
tion of  Collectivism,  but  also  as  to  its  application.  The 
Collectivist  Commonwealth  is  such  a  nebulosity  that  no 
two  Socialists  can  agree  even  as  to  its  outline,  let  alone 
its  concrete  substance. 

As  to  the  other  aspects  and  phases  of  Socialism,  there 
is  hopeless  disagreement.    When  Socialists  say,  as  some 


22  WHAT   IS    SOCIALISM? 

do,  that  there  is  only  one  kind  of  Socialism — and  that 
is  always  the  kind  which  they  themselves  preach — they 
unconsciously  or  deliberately  shut  their  eyes  to  the  facts. 
Next  to  the  followers  of  Mr.  Hyndman  in  England,  the 
most  professedly  orthodox  of  them  all  are  the  Social 
Democracy  of  Germany,  and  they  have  considerably 
modified  their  attitude  if  not  their  doctrines  within 
recent  years.  As  to  the  British  Socialists,  the  over- 
whelming majority  of  them  are  avowedly  Fabian  Oppor- 
tunists, notwithstanding  the  declarations  of  the  "Labor- 
ites"  in  favor  of  "class-conscious"  Revolutionarv  Social- 
ism,  and  their  recent  admission  into  the  ranks  of  "Inter- 
nationalism," the  rallying  cry  of  which  is  "class  con- 
sciousness" and  the  downfall  of  Capitalism. 

In  America. 

Coming  to  the  United  States,  Socialism  is  "in  the  air." 
There  is  not,  as  yet,  any  American  "school."  The  liter- 
ary leaders  of  the  movement  in  this  country  are,  with 
few  exceptions,  adherents  of  rigid,  cold,  German  Social- 
ist Calvinism.  This  is  primarily  owing  to  the  fact  that 
the  establishment  of  Socialism  in  America  was  mainly 
through  German  revolutionary  immigrants.  Outside  of 
the  Christian  Socialists — who  are  little  else  than  senti- 
mentalists— the  prevailing  Socialism  in  this  country  is 
dominated  by  what  the  Anglo-American  expounder, 
Spargo,  designates  as  "the  handful  of  German  Socialist 
exiles  in  America,  who  sought  to  make  the  American 
workers  swallow  a  mass  of  ill-digested  Marxian  the- 
ory." In  this  connection,  Spargo  quotes  the  greatest  of 
all  authorities  next  to  Marx  himself,  Engels,  who  makes 
the  following  remarkable  criticism  of  the  German  pre- 
sentation   of    Socialism    in    America:     "The    Germans 


INTRODUCTION  23 

have  never  understood  how  to  apply  themselves  from 
their  theory  to  the  level  which  could  set  the  American 
masses  in  motion ;  to  a  great  extent  they  do  not  under- 
stand the  theory  itself,  and  treat  it  in  a  doctrinaire  and 
dogmatic  fashion.  .  .  .  It  is  a  credo  to  them,  not  a 
guide  of  action."  As  to  the  unscientific,  Opportunist. 
Fabian  Socialism  of  England,  Engels  has  this  to  say : 
"Here  an  instinctive  Socialism  is  more  and  more  taking 
possession  of  the  masses,  which,  fortunately,  is  opposed 
to  all  distinct  formulation  according  to  the  dogmas  of 
one  or  the  other  so-called  organizations."  The  German 
Socialists  in  America  have  not  kept  up  with  their  com- 
rades of  the  Fatherland  in  economic  evolution.  Theo- 
retically, the  leaders  of  Socialism  in  America  are,  as  a 
rule,  uncompromisingly  revolutionary :  not  that  they 
are  in  favor  of  a  physical  revolution  to  bring  about  the 
realization  of  their  ideas,  but  that  they  believe — as  Marx 
taught — that  social  and  economic  conditions  will  get 
worse  and  worse,  until  finally  they  will  become  unbear- 
able ;  and  then,  by  a  catastrophic  change,  through  the 
proletariat  securing  control  of  the  machinery  of  govern- 
ment, the  Co-operative  Commonwealth  will  be  estab- 
lished; that,  in  fact,  the  present  economic  and  social 
state  is  past  being  mended,  but  must  be  ended  :  and  its 
ending,  and  the  substitution  of  Collectivism,  constitute 
the  "revolution"  referred  to.  In  justice  to  the  "ad- 
vanced," "scientific"  Socialists  so  vigorously  condemned 
by  Mr.  Roosevelt,  it  is  proper  to  keep  this  in  mind,  as 
many  critics  evidently  interpret  the  word  "revolution," 
used  in  this  connection,  to  mean  a  resort  to  physical 
force.  There  are  physical-force  Socialists,  but  they  are 
in  an  infinitesimal  minority  in  such  countries  as  the 
United   States,   Great    Britain   and   Germany.      Broadly 


24  WHAT   IS    SOCIALISM? 

speaking,  the  school  in  opposition  to  Revolutionary 
Socialism  is  that  of  the  Fabians,  who  have  shaped  and 
directed  the  movement  in  England,  and  whose  policy  is, 
despite  assertions  to  the  contrary,  considerably  modify- 
ing Marxian  Socialism  throughout  the  world.  This 
school — destined  to  be  the  predominant  one — is  also 
known  as  Opportunist  and  Constructive.  American 
Socialism  has  already  commenced  to  cast  its  hard  Marx- 
ian shell,  and  is  taking  on  the  more  adaptable  garment 
of  Fabianism,  of  a  cut  and  color  suited  to  American 
conditions. 

Is  Revolution  Imminent? 

Both  in  America  and  England  there  is  a  popular  belief 
that  Modern  Socialism,  irrespective  of  any  particular 
school,  is  directly  connected  with,  and  is,  indeed,  the 
actual  descendant  of,  French  insurrectionary  Commun- 
ism. This  is  the  view  taken  by  one  of  the  most  slashing 
of  the  English  critics,  W.  Lawler  Wilson,  in  a  remark- 
able book,  The  Menace  of  Socialism.  Mr.  Wilson  con- 
siders it  practically  certain  that — 

1.  A  social  revolution  will  break  out  in  Europe  within  the 
next  two  or  three  years. 

2.  This  revolution  will  be  more  extensive  in  area  and  ter- 
rible in  character  than  any  that  has  occurred  for  two  genera- 
tions past. 

3.  The  revolutionaries  will  win  great  temporary  successes 
and   will   succeed  in   establishing  local   governments. 

4.  The  rebellion  will  be  suppressed  after  much  bloodshed, 
after  which  the  Social  Revolutionary  movement  as  a  whole 
will  die  out  for  the  greater  part  of  a  generation. 

Tt  is  noteworthy  that  some  Socialist  writers  take  the 
same  view  that  Mr.  Wilson  does,  except  that  they  be- 


INTRODUCTION  25 

lieve  that  the  revolution  will  he  permanently  successful. 
But,  at  the  same  time,  it  is  proper  to  repeat  that  most 
of  the  recognized  representative  authorities  disclaim  all 
idea  of  a  physical  revolution. 

Labor  and  Socialism. 

There  are  two  different  Socialist  organizations  ap- 
pealing to  the  suffrages  of  the  American  people,  and 
hoth  of  them  are  based  upon  the  "class  consciousness" 
of  the  working  men.  Here  it  is  pertinent  to  remark  that 
there  is  no  country  in  the  world  where — at  present,  at 
any  rate — there  is  less  class  consciousness  than  in  the 
United  States,  whether  among  the  working  men  or  any 
other  element  of  the  general  citizenship.  As  Socialism 
has  been  presented  to  the  American  people,  it  has  never 
(until  recently)  appealed  to  any  considerable  number 
of  them,  especially  among  the  native  element — not  even 
to  a  large  number  of  what,  for  the  sake  of  definiteness, 
may  be  classed  as  the  "proletariat."  Socialism  must  be 
"Americanized" — that  is,  it  must  be  formulated  and 
modified  to  meet  American  ideas  and  conditions — before 
it  can  become  a  potential  force  in  the  political  and  social 
life  of  this  country.  It  must  be  confessed  that  there  are 
now  circumstances  and  conditions  in  process  of  devel- 
opment which  will  not  unlikely  bring  this  about,  irre- 
spective of  the  attitude  of  the  present  leaders  of  either 
Socialism  or  the  Trade  Union  movement,  which  at  pres- 
ent is  not  a  mutually  cordial  one ;  and  it  is  noteworthy 
that  in  this  respect  American  organized  Labor  occupies 
an  absolutely  unique  position,  as  this  is  the  only  pro- 
gressive country  in  the  world  in  which  the  two  move- 
ments are  not  allied,  to  a  greater  or  less  extent.  In 
England,  Socialism  was  nothing  but  a  shadowy,  far-off 


26  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

theory  or  cult,  held  by  but  a  few,  until  an  "alliance"  with 
organized  Labor  was  formed;  and  the  cause  which 
brought  about  this  alliance  was  a  judicial  decision  which 
Trade  Unionists  looked  upon  as  an  assault  upon  their 
organizations,  by  destroying  them  through  bankrupting 
their  treasuries,  as  they  claimed.  The  judgment  in 
question  is  what  is  known  as  the  "Taff  Vale  decision," 
making  Trade  Unions  financially  responsible  for  dam- 
ages in  strikes  and  boycotts.  Some  such  an  incident 
may  throw  organized  labor  in  this  country  into  the  arms 
of  Socialism.  It  is  a  fact  of  grave  significance  that  the 
special  grievance  of  American  organized  Labor  is  one 
growing  out  of  judicial  decisions,  it  being  claimed,  in- 
deed, that  in  this  respect  American  Trade  Unionists  are 
at  a  great  disadvantage  as  compared  with  their  British 
comrades. 

Developments  in  America. 

The  American  people  are  only  just  beginning  to 
appreciate  the  profound  importance  of  the  question  of 
Socialism.  But  until  the  last  two  years,  organized 
Socialism  has  been  but  little  in  evidence  in  this  country 
except  during  Presidential  elections.  It  not  only  lacks 
effective  organization,  but  it  is  indefinite  in  expression 
and  aim.  Unquestionably,  the  peculiar  form  of  the 
American  system  of  government — Federal  and  State — 
has  something  to  do  with  the  difficulty  of  focussing  the 
theory  upon  conditions  here.  A  characteristic  difficulty 
which  Socialism  and  also  Trade  Unionism — has  to 
contend  againsl  in  America,  as  compared,  say,  with  Eng- 
land, is  one  arising  from  the  written  Federal  and  State 
constitutions  in  this  country.  This  fact  makes  it  impos- 
sible—in  a  practical    sense— for  a   State   legislature  or 


INTRODUCTION  27 

even  for  Congress  to  pass  laws  similar  to  many  which 
have  been  passed  by  the  Ilritish  Parliament  within  the 
last  few  years.  Reference  is  here  made  to  laws  grant- 
ing special  privileges  and  immunities  to  organized  La- 
bor, as  is  done  in  the  new  British  Trades  Disputes  Act. 
But,  apart  from  these  considerations,  the  Co-operative 
Commonwealth  has  been  too  visionary,  too  theoretical, 
for  the  average,  practical,  "hurry-up"  American  to  take 
much  interest  in  it.  Nevertheless,  the  general  principles 
and  mode  of  thought  of  the  Socialists  are  now  appealing 
to  an  ever-increasing  number  of  Americans — and  native 
Americans  at  that.  The  time  was  when  Socialism,  to 
the  native  American  mind,  was  associated  exclusively 
with  recent  arrivals  from  the  Teutonic  Fatherland,  who 
discussed  Karl  Marx  and  the  "coming  revolution"  over 
steins  of  lager  beer ;  but  that  day  has  passed.  In  the  old 
countries  it  is  mainly  hatred  of  class  distinctions  which 
has  turned  the  hopes  of  the  proletariat  to  Socialism  as 
the  only  means  of  their  redemption,  socially,  industrially 
and  politically.  These  class  distinctions  originally 
sprang  from  the  hereditary  privileges  of  the  few,  espe- 
cially as  to  the  possession  of  the  land ;  and  it  was  no 
less  an  American  than  John  Adams  who  said,  "Those 
who  own  the  land  will  rule  the  country."  When  the 
"industrial  revolution"  came  about,  these  hereditary 
distinctions  in  Europe  were  supplemented  by  another 
difference  almost  as  great, — that  of  the  possession  of 
the  means  of  production  by  the  few  and  the  lack  of  own- 
ership of  these  means  by  the  many.  It  is  a  matter  of 
common  remark  among  Americans,  when  they  are  frank 
with  themselves,  that  class  distinctions  are  now  develop- 
ing in  this  country.  While  there  is  an  absence  of  hered- 
itary privileges,  the  distinction  between  the  "haves"  and 


28  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

the  "have-nots"  is  all  the  time  growing;  and  while  there 
is  not  the  hopeless,  squalid  poverty  and  pauperism  to  be 
even  approachably  seen  in  America  as  compared  with 
England,  yet,  on  the  other  hand,  great  wealth  in  the 
hands  of  the  comparatively  few  is  more  arrogantly 
ostentatious,  and  is  also  more  vigorously  denounced,  in 
America,  than  in  the  older  countries ;  and  it  is  also  a 
fact  that  in  the  attainment  of  great  wealth  the  rights  of 
the  people  are  held  in  less  respect  in  America  than  in 
most  other  countries — although  a  refreshing  change  in 
this  regard  is  within  sight.  To  put  the  matter  in  a  nut- 
shell :  the  multi-millionaire  is  more  unpopular  in  Amer- 
ica than  is  the  hereditary  aristocrat  in  Europe.  Every 
candid  student  of  the  times  must  come  to  the  conclu- 
sion that  as  the  development  of  the  ownership  of  the 
means  of  production  in  the  hands  of  vast  combinations 
proceeds,  so  likewise  will  there  develop  a  growth  of  the 
class-conscious  feeling  among  the  working  people  of 
America ;  and  it  is  the  full  recognition  of  this  class  con- 
sciousness which  is  the  hope  and  mainstay  of  Socialism. 
It  may  be  accepted  as  a  settled  thing  that  the  time  is 
near  at  hand  when  the  working  people  of  America  will 
demand  actual  representation  in  the  halls  of  legislation 
— Municipal,  State,  and  National ; — in  fact,  that  time  is 
already  here.  Heretofore,  the  American  working  man 
has  been  content  to  be  included  in  the  general  body  of 
the  electorate  and  citizenry.  It  may  be  said  that  he 
ought  to  be  still  so  satisfied — that  there  ought  not  to  be 
any  political  class  distinctions;  and.  in  an  ideal  slate  of 
society,  this  is  undoubtedly  true.  But,  under  existing 
conditions,  and  in  the  absence  of  any  great  overwhelm- 
ing public  questions,  men  will  vote  as  they  think  their 
own  personal,  selfish  interests  are  involved.     There  is  no 


INTRODUCTION  29 

such  great  question  dividing  political  parties  these  days, 
and  the  outlook  is  that  the  coming  questions  to  be  de- 
cided will  be  chiefly  economic.  It  is  therefore  inevitable 
that  the  working  people,  dependent  on  wages  for  a  liv- 
ing, will  from  now  on  begin  to  look  at  public  questions 
from  more  of  a  class-conscious  standpoint  than  they 
formerly  did;  and  the  first  expression  of  this  change 
of  attitude  will  be  in  the  struggle  for  special  representa- 
tion in  legislative  bodies.  In  this  connection  it  should 
be  borne  in  mind  that  about  the  only  great  special  "inter- 
est" which  is  not  represented  at  Washington  is  that  of 
Labor. 

Socialism  Already  Here! 

The  year  1910  will  be  historic  in  the  history  of  Amer- 
ican Socialism:  For  the  first  time  a  large  city  (Mil- 
waukee) elected  a  Socialist  Mayor  and  government, 
and  the  first  Socialist  Representative  to  Congress  (Vic- 
tor Berger,  of  the  same  city)  was  elected.  And  in  191 1 
Socialism  won  some  notable  triumphs  in  local  elections. 

Let  not  the  American  people  deceive  themselves.  Let 
them  take  warning  from  the  experience  of  the  British 
people,  who  complacently  (and  characteristically)  ig- 
nored the  existence  and  growth  of  Socialism  until  the 
elections  of  1906  startled  them;  and  then  they  wore 
amazed  to  discover  what  a  giant  Socialism  was.  and 
how  it  was  entrenched  in  the  very  citadel  of  the  British 
Empire — in  the  Mother  of  Parliaments. 

Socialism — the  real  article,  Modern.  Scientific,  Revo- 
lutionary Socialism — has  obtained  a  foothold  in  Amer- 
ica ;  it  is  bound  to  grow,  and  probably  to  grow  enor- 
mously, within  the  not  distant  future.  So  far,  organized 
Labor  has  been  the  rock  against  which  Revolutionary 


30  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

Socialism  has  beaten  in  vain  in  its  efforts  to  become  an 
effective  political  force  in  America.  But  that  impedi- 
ment shows  signs  of  yielding — as  it  has  yielded  in  Eng- 
land. Indeed,  in  1910,  and  still  more  so  in  191 1,  organ- 
ized Labor  and  Socialism  "pooled  their  issues"  on  many 
questions,  and  there  is  now  an  increasing  tendency 
toward  a  practical  alliance  as  to  "immediate  demands," 
if  not  an  actual  acceptance  of  the  theory  of  Collectivism 
on  the  part  of  Trade  Unionism.  It  is  significant  that 
avowed  Socialists — sometimes  of  the  extreme  Revolu- 
tionary type — are  often  now  found  at  the  head  of  Labor 
organizations,  and  in  their  extravagances  of  expression 
it  is  often  difficult  to  determine  in  which  capacity  they 
speak.  Notwithstanding  that  the  Socialists  have  a 
wordy  war  with  the  old-line  Trade  Unionists  at  each 
annual  Convention  of  the  American  Federation  of  La- 
bor, and  notwithstanding  that  there  is  much  personal 
bitterness  between  the  Socialists  and  the  President  of 
the  Federation  (Samuel  Gompers),  yet  there  is  an  un- 
mistakable drift  toward  "getting  together"  on  the  part 
of  the  rival  elements,  the  opposition  being  largely  one 
of  tactics  and  individual  jealousy. 

The  late  Senator  Hanna  is  often  quoted  as  saying  that 
the  coming  conflict  in  America  will  be  between  the 
forces  of  Socialism  and  anti-Socialism;  and  1912  was 
named  by  him  as  the  date  of  the  beginning  of  the  Titanic 
struggle. 

Robert  Owen,  the  Father  of  Modern  Socialism. 

The  foundation  idea  of  Modern  Socialism  was  chiefly 
humanitarian: — the  expression  of  the  philanthropic  love 
for  his  fcllow-bcings  by  Robert  Owen,  who  was  born  at 
Newton,  Montgomeryshire,  North  Wales,  May  14,  1771. 


INTRODUCTION  31 

His  name  is  intimately  related  to  America,  not  only  on 
his  own  account,  but  on  account  of  his  distinguished  son, 
Robert  Dale  Owen. 

Robert  Owen  is  often  styled  "the  father  of  Modern 
Socialism."  Karl  Marx  is  generally  so  honored — and 
he  undoubtedly  is  its  greatest  prophet ;  but  the  truth  is 
that  Marx  only  gave  scientific  expression  and  elabora- 
tion to  principles  laid  down  by  Owen  a  year  before 
Marx  was  born ;  and  some  of  the  distinctive  doctrines 
of  Marxian  Socialism  had  been  enunciated  long  before 
then,  by  English  economists,  principally.  In  a  practical 
sense — and  apart  from  Owen's  Utopianism  and  his  other 
wild  schemes — Owen  is  entitled  to  the  distinction  of 
being  the  first  of  Modern  Socialists ;  the  birthplace  of 
the  movement  was  London,  and  the  year  was  181 7. 
Owen  appeared  that  year  before  a  committee  of  the 
House  of  Commons,  and  made  a  report  on  the  Poor 
Laws,  which  at  that  time  were  a  disgrace  to  England. 
In  that  report  Owen  claimed  that  the  permanent  cause 
of  distress  was  in  the  competition  of  human  labor  with 
machinery,  and  that  the  only  effectual  remedy  was  in 
the  united  action  of  working  men  and  the  subordination 
of  machinery.  Owen  was  not  in  favor  of  abandoning 
machinery,  but  he  believed  that  the  manufacturing  sys- 
tem could  be  so  arranged  as  to  be  an  advantage  to  the 
whole  community,  instead  of  being,  as  he  strenuously 
insisted,  a  curse.  One  of  Owen's  most  active  friends 
in  "high  places"  (and  he  had  many,  including  Queen 
Victoria's  father)  was  Lord  Shaftesbury,  "the  working- 
man's  friend,"  who  was,  however,  an  anti-Socialist. 
Owen's  original  schemes  for  the  cure  of  pauperism  were 
favored  by  such  conservative  organs  of  public  opinion 
as  the   London   Times   and  the   Morning  Post.     After 


32  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

returning  from  America  (where  he  had  been  in  the  inter- 
est of  a  communal  association,  the  "Harmonists"),  he 
devoted  himself  to  carrying-  on  a  propaganda  for  Social- 
ism and  Secularism,  with  lax  ideas  of  marriage.  Just 
when  Owen  was  at  the  apex  of  his  popularity,  and  when 
some  of  his  ideas  seemed  to  be  most  promising  in  out- 
look, he  declared,  at  a  meeting  in  London,  his  hostility 
to  all  forms  of  received  religion.  From  that  time  Social- 
ism became  identified  with  infidelity,  and  was  suspected 
and  discredited.  Later  in  life  Owen  became  a  firm 
Spiritualist. 

While  Owen's  fame  as  a  Socialist  is  mainly  in  con- 
nection with  his  schemes  of  communal  co-operative  asso- 
ciations, both  in  America  and  England  (now  known  as 
"Utopian  Socialism"),  yet,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  he  was 
the  first  reformer  to  understand — although  not  in  its 
entire  conception — the  philosophic  and  economic  basis 
of  Modern  Scientific  Socialism.  Brougham  Villiers  says 
(The  Social  Movement  in  England)  that  up  to  the  com- 
mencement of  the  Victorian  era,  Owen  was  probably 
"the  most  modern  Socialist  in  the  world." 

It  is  a  remarkable  fact  that  the  beginning  of  Modern 
Socialism  did  not  arise  from  the  agitation  or  action  of 
organized  Labor,  nor  of  an  individual  proletarian,  but 
sprang  from  the  philanthropic  action  of  a  middle-class 
capitalist,  a  member  of  the  much-disliked  bourgeoisie- — 
for  that  is  what  Robert  Owen  was.  In  September,  1833, 
Owen  addressed  a  convention  of  the  Builders'  Union, 
at  Manchester,  England,  and  it  was  on  this  occasion 
that  he  declared  that  "labor  is  the  source  of  all  wealth" 
— thus  anticipating  Marx,  or  at  any  rate  a  doctrine  held 
by  most  Marxists. 

There  can  be  no  doubt  that  yie  ever-present  weight 


INTRODUCTION  33 

on  his  mind  of  the  great  cause  to  which  he  had  devoted 
his  life  affected  his  judgment  in  his  later  years;  and  he 
became  erratic  and  extravagant  in  his  ideas.  Eight 
years  before  he  died  he  made  the  wild  declaration  that 
the  world  was  "a  great  lunatic  asylum !"  Yet,  there  are 
but  few  men  in  the  history  of  efforts  to  benefit  the 
human  race  and  to  restrain  ''man's  inhumanity  to  man," 
whose  memory  deserves  greater  honor  than  Robert 
Owen,  the  "father  of  Modern  Socialism."  The  most 
convinced  of  anti-Socialists  can  join  in  that  tribute. 


CHAPTER    II 

WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

Origin  of  the  word  "Socialism." 

There  has  been  much  discussion  as  to  the  origin  of 
the  word  "Socialism ;"  but  there  is  now,  however,  a 
general  agreement  that  it  was  first  used  in  the  Poor 
Man's  Guardian  (England)  in  1833,  and  that  it  became 
for  the  first  time  current  in  England  in  1835,  during 
the  Robert  Owen  agitation.  Shortly  afterwards,  a 
French  critic  of  the  theory,  Reybaud,  introduced  the 
word  on  the  Continent.  Subsequently,  another  French 
economist,  Pierre  Leroux,  author  of  a  work  expounding 
a  system  called  "Humanitarianism,"  claimed  to  have 
invented  the  term  in  contradistinction  to  "Individual- 
ism ;"  and  Leroux  defined  Socialism  as  a  "political 
organization  in  which  the  individual  is  sacrificed  to 
society."  It  is  not  unlikely  that  the  term  originated 
about  the  same  time  in  more  than  one  place. 

Definitions. 

Experts  in  economic  terminology  indulge  in  hair- 
splitting differences  in  denning  Socialism.  Prof.  Robert 
Flint,  of  the  University  of  Edinburgh — probably  the 
keenest  of  all  scholarly  British  critics — takes  the  posi- 
tion that  there  is  not  any  satisfactory  definition  of  So- 
cialism,  for  the  reason  that  there  arc  so  many  varieties 

34 


WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM?  35 

and  so  many  different  points  of  view  from  which  it  is 
looked  at.  It  would  be  unreasonable,  he  says,  to  ask 
for  any  definition  which  would  be  satisfactory  to  both 
Socialists  and  their  opponents.  Prof.  Flint's  own  defini- 
tion is:  "Any  theory  of  social  organization  which  sac- 
rifices the  legitimate  liberties  of  individuals  to  the  will 
or  interests  of  the  community."  E.  Belfort  Bax,  the 
literary  leader  of  British  Marxism,  comes  to  much  the 
same  conclusion  that  Prof.  Flint  does,  he  declaring  in 
an  article  in  The  Open  Review  (London)  July,  1909, 
that  "A  world-historic  movement  like  Socialism  is  too 
bie  a  thine--  to  be  fitted  into  the  four  corners  of  a  one- 
sentence  formula." 

When  Pierre  Joseph  Proudhon,  the  father  of  "Philo- 
sophic Anarchism,"  was  before  a  magistrate  on  exam- 
ination after  the  French  Revolution  of  1848,  he  was 
asked  "What  is  Socialism?"  His  answer  was,  "Every 
aspiration  toward  the  amelioration  of  society."  "In 
that  case,"  remarked  the  magistrate,  "we  are  all  Social- 
ists." "That  is  precisely  what  I  think,"  responded 
Proudhon.  This  reminds  one  of  the  declaration  once 
made  by  the  English  statesman,  Sir  William  Harcourt : 
"We  are  all  Socialists  now !" 

Not  only  popularly,  but  also  among  students  and 
economists,  the  term  "Socialism"  is  now  meant  to  apply 
specifically  to  Modern,  Scientific,  Marxian  Socialism^ 
including  its  varying  interpretations.  There  are  several 
kinds  not  now  included,  particularly  Utopian  Socialism, 
such  as  is  presented  in  the  form  of  romances  by  Plato 
in  his  Republic,  More  in  his  Utopia,  and  Bellamy  in 
Looking  Backward;  and  in  such  actual  Utopian  com- 
munistic experiments  as  those  made  by  the  Owenites, 
the  Harmonites,  the  Shakers,  the  Oneida   Community, 


36  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

the  Zoarites,  etc., — all  of  which  must  be  considered  as 
failures  not  only  from  the  Socialist  view,  but  from  the 
standpoint  of  plain,  practical,  every-day  life.  Neither 
does  the  term,  as  now  used  by  informed  people,  apply 
to  Bismarck's  scheme  of  paternal  "State  Socialism/' 
which,  as  a  system,  is  repudiated  as  such,  by  the  organ- 
ized Socialists  of  Germany,  although  they  practically 
acquiesce  in  it  as  "a  means  to  an  end" — that  end  being 
Collectivism.  And  yet,  State  Socialism  is  not  only 
accepted  by  English  Socialists,  but  most  of  their  activi- 
ties are  in  the  direction  of  forcing  the  Government  of 
the  day,  or  the  Councils  of  Municipalities,  to  grant 
instalments  of  State  or  Municipal  Socialism,  as  the  case 
may  be.  In  1896  the  English  Fabian  Society  issued  a 
statement  for  the  information  of  their  Continental  com- 
rades, in  which  it  was  explained  that  the  Socialism  they 
advocated  was  "State  Socialism  exclusively."  This 
opens  up  a  wide  field  of  controversy  among  Socialists ; 
but  briefly,  the  explanation  of  this  apparent  difference 
is  that  in  a  democratic  country  like  England  the  pro- 
letarian objections  to  State  Socialism  which  exist  in  a 
bureaucratic  country  like  Germany,  are  not  considered 
to  be  applicable.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  moreover,  the 
practical  Opportunism  of  British  Socialism  (sometimes 
called  "Constructive  Socialism")  is  now  becoming  the 
dominant  school  throughout  the  world. 

It  is  said  that  Karl  Marx,  the  "father"  of  so-called 
"Scientific"  Socialism,  never  gave  a  concrete  definition 
of  his  theory,  except  the  following  (from  his  preface 
to  the  second  edition  of  his  great  elaboration  Capital) 
be  considered  as  one:  "With  me  the  ideal  is  nothing 
else  than  the  material  world  reflected  by  the  human 
mind  and  translated  into  forms  of  thought." 


WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM?  37 

There  has  never  been  framed  any  better  brief  defini- 
tion of  Modern  Socialism  in  its  economic  aspect  than 
tjiat  by  one  of  its  first  expounders  as  well  as  critics — 
Dr.  A.  Shanie,  the  eminent  Austrian  economist,  in  The 
Quintessence  of  Socialism: — "The  Alpha  and  Omega  of 
Socialism  is  the  transformation  of  private  and  compet- 
ing capitals  into  a  united  collective  capital." 

Paul  Lafargue,  who  was  a  son-in-law  of  Marx,  and 
one  of  the  founders  of  Marxian  Socialism  in  France, 
defines  the  theory  as  "a  fatal  economic  evolution  which 
will  establish  collective  ownership  in  the  hands  of  organ- 
izations of  workers,  in  place  of  the  individual  owner- 
ship of  capital." 

John  Stuart  Mill,  in  the  Fortnightly  Review,  April, 
1879,  says: 

What  is  characteristic  of  Socialism  is  the  joint  ownership 
by  all  members  of  the  community  of  the  instruments  and 
means  of  production,  which  carries  with  it  the  consequence 
that  the  division  of  all  the  produce  among  the  body  of  the 
owners  must  be  a  public  act  performed  according  to  rules 
laid  down  by  the  community. 

The  Rev.  Dr.  Bliss  (who  is  editor  of  the  Encyclope- 
dia of  Social  Reform,  and  is  himself  a  Christian  Social- 
ist), after  quoting  a  number  of  definitions,  sums  them 
up  thus : — "Socialism  may  be  said  to  be  the  collective 
ownership  of  the  means  of  production  by  the  community 
democratically  organized  and  their  operation  co-opera- 
tively for  the  equitable  good  of  all." 

The  Socialist  organizations  of  America,  Germany, 
and  Great  Britain  define  their  basic  principles  in  terms 
which,  while  differing  in  expression,  are  practically  to 
the  same  effect.     It  should  be  added  that  land  and  such 


38  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

natural  products  as  coal,  ore,  etc.,  are  included  among 
"means  of  production,"  by  Socialists  of  all  countries. 

The  definitions  given  above,  it  will  be  observed,  refer 
only  to  the  industrial  or  economic  side  of  Socialism. 
The  latter-day  Constructive  Socialists  claim  that  their 
theory  has  only  an  economic  side;  but  nearly  all  the 
great  shining  lights  who  profess  orthodoxy  insist  that 
Socialism  means -far  .more  than  a  mere  change  &f  capi- 
tal from  private  to  public  ownership.  They  argue  that 
it  Ts  a  condition,  not  a  creed,  and  that  that  condition  will 
affect  all  the  relations  of  life :  social,  family,  religious, 
artistic,  etc.,  as  well  as  industrial  and  political.  It  is 
here  that  the  moral  argument  for  and  against  Socialism 
forces  itself  to  the  front;  and  it  is  this  fact,  involving 
as  it  does  such  tremendously  different  conceptions  of 
the  system,  which  makes  it  practically  impossible  to 
frame  any  formula  or  brief  definition  of  Socialism  which 
will  be  adequately  comprehensive  as  well  as  discriminat- 
ingly exact.  Probably  there  is  a  consensus  of  judgment 
that  the  greatest  living  Socialist  is  Ferd  August  Bebel, 
one  of  the  founders  of  the  German  Social  Democratic 
Party,  and  the  leader  of  that  party  in  the  Reichstag. 
He  gives  this  definition  in  Die  Fran  and  der  Sozialis- 
mus: — "Socialism  is  Science  applied  with  clear  con- 
sciousness and  full  knowledge  to  every  sphere  of  human 
activity." 

There  is  another  pronouncement  of  Bebel's  which  is 
one  of  the  most-often  quoted  of  any  ever  made  by  an 
acknowledged  leader  of  International  Socialism : — "We 
aim  in  the  domain  of  Politics  at  Republicanism ;  in  the 
domain  of  bxonomics  at  Socialism,  in  the  domain  of 
what  is  to-day  called  Religion  at  Atheism." 


WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM?  39 

This  phase  of  the  subject  is  treated  at  some  length 
in  the  chapter  devoted  to  Marxian  Socialism. 

What  is  "Orthodox"  Socialism? 

There  is  a  sharp  controversy  going  on  in  current 
Socialist  literature — which  sometimes  takes  a  personal 
turn — as  to  who  are  really  true  believers ;  and  the  charge 
is  made  by  certain  Socialists  that  some  of  the  most 
prominent  men  identified  with  the  movement  are  heter- 
odox, and  in  some  cases  are  really  base  pretenders.  For 
some  time  there  has  been  waging  a  polemic  between  the 
English  Fabians  and  the  strict  Marxians.  G.  Bernard 
Shaw,  the  eminent  playwright,  and  almost  as  eminent  as 
a  Socialist,  has  a  preface  to  the  last  edition  (1908)  of 
Fabian  Essays,  in  which  he  is  very  sarcastic  in  his  ref- 
erences to  the  "many  little  societies  locally  known  as 
'the  Socialists,' " — meaning  the  self-styled  "scientific" 
followers  of  Karl  Marx.  With  that  playful  humor 
which  is  his  own  he  derides  their  worship  of  the  "Mas- 
ter," "of  whose  works  they  are  for  the  most  part  igno- 
rant and  of  whose  views  they  are  intellectually  incapa- 
ble." According  to  Bernard  Shaw,  the  particular  school 
of  which  he  is  such  a  distinguished  leader  has  swept  the 
field  during  recent  years.  Says  he :  "Since  1889  the 
Socialist  movement  has  been  completely  transformed 
throughout  Europe;  and  the  result  of  the  transforma- 
tion may  fairly  be  described  as  Fabian  Socialism."  On 
the  other  hand,  John  Spargo — who  speaks  from  the 
standpoint  of  both  an  English  and  an  American  Social- 
ist— declares  in  the  International  Socialist  Review  (Chi- 
cago), of  May,  1909,  that  "there  are  few  American  So- 
cialists who  will  take  their  Socialism  from  the  Fabian 


40  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

Essays."  And  yet,  probably  next  to  Blatchford's  Merrie 
England  there  is  no  exposition  of  Socialism  which  has 
had  such  a  world-wide  circulation  and  popular  influ- 
ence as  the  Fabian  Essays!  It  will  hardly  be  disputed 
that  the  most  philosophical  and  learned  of  all  living 
British  Socialist  writers  is  E.  Belfort  Bax,  the  literary 
partner  of  the  artist-poet,  William  Morris,  the  latter  of 
whom  is  claimed  by  competent  authority  to  be  "the 
greatest  personality  that  has  ever  been  connected  with 
Socialism  in  England,  or  perhaps  in  the  modern  world." 
(Brougham  Yilliers,  The  Socialist  Movement  in  Eng- 
land.) In  an  essay  defining  what  Socialism  is  and  what 
it  is  not,  Bax  scornfully  calls  the  Fabians  "practical 
prigs!"  And  in  another  essay  (Christianity  and  Social- 
ism) he  declares  that  the  Fabians  are  "persons  calling 
themselves  Socialists  .  .  .  who  are  either  unclear 
on  the  whole  question  or  who  are  at  variance  with  the 
fundamental  article  of  Socialist  doctrine  on  other 
points."  In  still  another  essay  (Faddist  Fanaticism). 
after  describing  a  number  of  different  so-called  Social- 
ists, Bax  wearily  exclaims,  "O  Socialism,  Socialism, 
what  queer  fish  they  would  have  us  assimilate  in  thy 
name!"  He  adjures  his  Marxian  Social  Democratic 
comrades  to  "remember  that  Socialist  principle  is  defi- 
nite and  not  to  be  played  fast  and  loose  with  by  Social- 
ists." A  true  Socialist,  he  insists,  must,  if  the  occasion 
calls  for  it,  even  be  "the  enemy  of  his  country,  and  the 
friend  of  his  country's  enemies!"  Yet  even  Bax  does 
not  wholly  accept  the  doctrines  of  Marx.  No  foreign 
Socialist  author  is  bitter  known — and,  indeed,  respected 
— in  America  than  Sidney  Webb,  who  specially  wrote 
Socialism  in  England  at  the  requesl  of  the  American 
Economic  Association,  the  work-  being  published  by  the 


WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM  ?  41 

Johns  Hopkins  University.  But  Bax  refuses  to  recog- 
nize Webb  as  a  Socialist;  and  referring  to  that  High 
Priest  of  Fabianism,  Bax  inquires,  with  disgust, 
"Now,  are  we  ...  to  be  condemned  to  hug  such 
a  man  as  this  to  our  bosom  as  a  'comrade'  because,  for- 
sooth, he  can  in  a  certain  sense  repeat  that  he  favors 
the  'socialization  of  the  means,  etc.?'"  In  an  article 
in  the  Fortnightly  Review  (London)  of  August,  1908, 
Bax  repeats,  word  for  word,  the  definition  given  by 
himself  and  William  Morris  in  their  joint  work  Social- 
ism, Its  Growth  and  Outcome,  and  adds:  "This  defini- 
tion clearly  shuts  out  mere  Socialistic  legislation,  such 
as  may  obtain  to-day  within  the  framework,  economic 
and  political,  of  present  Capitalist  society,  from  the 
right  to  be  described  as  Socialism,  as  is  often  done  by 
'practical  politicians.'  '  The  contention  of  Bax,  as  a 
consistent  Scientific  Socialist,  is  that  no  legislation  or 
administration  can  be  called  Socialist  unless  its  "definite 
and  conscious  aim"  is  Socialism.  Tn  the  same  month 
that  the  rigid,  inflexible  Bax  defined  his  kind  of  Social- 
ism in  the  Fortnightly  Review,  another — and  just  as 
distinguished — Socialist  was  expounding  his  brand  of 
the  faith  in  the  Contemporary  Reviezv — H.  G.  Wells, 
the  author  of  New  Worlds  for  Old.  and  The  Future  in 
America,  and  other  well-known  works.  Wells  "dis- 
avows" Christian  Socialism,  which  he  calls  the  "Social- 
ism of  Condescension,"  and  he  emphatically  repudiates 
Marxism,  which  he  styles  "the  Socialism  of  Revolt." 
Mr.  Wells  resigned  from  the  Fabian  Society  (too  much 
Bernard  Shaw!),  and  he  now  declares  that  he  is  more 
opposed  to  the  "fugitive  Socialism"  of  the  Fabians  than 
he  is  to  any  other  kind ;  and  he  accuses  the  Fabian 
"specialist"    of    seeking    to    bring   about    Socialism    by 


42  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

"tricks  and  misrepresentations,  by  benevolent  scoun- 
drelism,  in  fact."  How  these  Socialists  love  one  an- 
other ! 

The  question  as  to  what  constitutes  orthodoxy  in 
Socialism  has  recently  become  an  acute  one  in  regard 
to  the  status  of  the  British  Labor-Socialist  allied  organ- 
izations, and  especially  as  to  the  views  held  by  Keir 
Hardy,  M.  P.,  the  founder  of  the  Independent  Labor 
Party,  the  most  active  of  all  the  British  Socialist  socie- 
ties in  the  field  of  politics.  This  is  not  simply  a  British 
question,  as  it  has  been  brought  over  to  America ;  and 
it  directly  affects  the  relations  of  the  American  Feder- 
ation of  Labor  and  other  Trade  Union  bodies  in  this 
country  to  organized  Socialism,  both  native  and  inter- 
national. 

Not  Anarchism,  nor  Communism. 

In  a  popular  sense,  Socialism  is  often  confused  with 
Anarchism  and  Communism ;  but  theoretically — and  in- 
deed, practically — there  is  a  great  difference.  Anarch- 
ism means  the  abolition  of  government  and  the  sover- 
eignty of  the  individual,  which  is  the  antithesis  of 
Socialism.  According  to  Anarchism,  only  individuals 
have  rights ;  and  the  argument  is.  that  as  no  individual 
has  the  right  to  coerce  or  govern  another  without  his 
consent,  neither  has  the  State  that  right,  the  State  being 
only  an  aggregation  of  individuals.  So,  according  to 
this  Anarchistic  theory,  no  form  of  government  is  jus- 
tifiable  unless  there  is  absolutely  universal  consent.  The 
right  of  a  majority  to  govern  or  coerce  a  minority  is 
denied,  even  though  that  minority  consists  only  of  one 
individual.  It  is  a  mistake  to  suppose  that  Anarchists 
want  to  turn  private  property  over  to  the  State.     But 


WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM?  43 

they  believe  in  voluntary  association  and  in  communal 
property — that  is,  that  those  who  contribute  their  labor 
to  the  production  of  necessities  should  receive  their 
share  of  the  products,  and  consume  them  as  they  please. 
There  are  two  schools  of  Anarchists:  (1)  Individual 
or  Philosophic  Anarchists,  who  do  not,  as  a  matter  of 
policy,  believe  in  the  use  of  force  to  attain  their  ends ; 
(2)  Anarchist-Communists,  who  believe  in  overthrow- 
ing government  by  force.  It  is  to  the  latter  school  that 
the  bomb-throwers  belong.  Most  of  the  Modern  Social- 
ists— from  Marx  down  to  the  present  day — not  only 
disclaim  all  association  and  sympathy  with  Anarchism, 
but  insist  that  their  doctrine  is  absolutely  opposed  to  it, 
as  Socialism  implies  the  supremacy  of  organized  society 
over  the  individual,  while  Anarchism  means  the  very 
opposite.  And,  it  should  be  stated  as  a  matter  of  jus- 
tice, that  in  most  constitutional  countries  the  leaders  of 
the  two  forces  have  generally  opposed  each  other  in 
seeking  to  obtain  control  of  the  proletarian  movement. 
It  is  equally  true,  however,  that  in  autocratic  countries 
like  Russia,  and  in  non-democratic  countries  like  Italy 
and  Spain,  Socialism  and  Anarchism  are  practically 
synonymous  terms — or  have  been  until  quite  a  recent 
period.  As  a  matter  of  argument,  also,  it  is  a  legiti- 
mate contention  that  the  result  of  Socialism  would  prob- 
ably be — from  a  complete  breakdown  in  itself,  in  prac- 
tical working — either  Anarchism  or  Absolutism. 

In  a  theoretical  sense  there  is  also  a  difference  be- 
tween Socialism  and  Communism.  Most  Socialists  now 
deny  that  they  are  Communists,  although  it  is  a  curious 
fact  that  the  first  authentic  international  statement  of 
Modern  Socialism — the  famous  '"call-to-arms"  to  the 
proletarians  of  the  world,  issued  jointly  by   Marx  and 


44  WHAT   IS    SOCIALISM? 

Engels  in  1848 — was  called  "The  Communist  Mani- 
festo/' And  as  late  as  1888,  Engels,  in  referring  with 
pride  to  this  title,  declared  that  "we  have,  ever  since, 
been  far  from  repudiating  it."  An  interesting  question 
not  unnaturally  suggests  itself  from  this  confession : — 
Were  not  Marx  and  Engels  really  Communists,  rather 
than  Socialists,  according  to  the  present  prevailing 
meaning  of  the  term  ?  And  furthermore : — Are  not 
most  of  their  followers  Communists  at  heart,  notwith- 
standing their  insistence  upon  a  difference  of  definition? 
Intellectual  Socialists  indignantly  deny  the  justice  of 
classing  them  with  the  Communists  or  "Communards" 
of  Paris,  whose  revolution,  by  the  way,  they  claim,  was 
owing  to  purely  political  and  not  economic  causes.  Yet, 
impartial  students  cannot  be  blamed  for  taking  note  of 
the  fact  that  even  at  the  present  time  Socialists,  both 
individually  and  collectively,  applaud  the  Communists 
of  Paris,  as  they  also  do  the  Anarchists  of  Chicago. 
Nevertheless,  there  is  a  definite  difference  between  the 
philosophy  of  Communism  and  that  of  Socialism, 
although  they  both  contemplate  the  abolition  of  the 
present  competitive,  wage-earning  system,  and  the  sub- 
stitution therefor  of  associated  production  and  distribu- 
tion.    But  there  is  this  difference: 

Communism,  in  the  strict  sense,  means  that  all  goods 
and  property  should  belong  to  the  community  in  com- 
mon, this  joint  possession  to  include  "consumption" 
goods  (such  as  food,  clothing,  articles  of  personal  use, 
etc.),  as  well  as  "production"  goods  (such  as  manufac- 
turing plants,  railways,  mines,  ships,  raw  materials, 
etc.  1  ;  while  Socialism — as  now  generally  defined — con- 
template tli"  collective  ownership  of  all  means  of  "pro- 
duction and  distribution"  only,  leaving  to  the  individual 


WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM?  45 

such  "consumption"  goods  as  he  might  earn  or  which 
might  be  allocated  to  him. 

Division  of  Labor's  Products. 

Some  authorities  make  this  further  difference: — Un- 
der Communism  there  is  an  equal  division  of  products, 
or  an  allowance  according  to  "needs ;"  while  compensa- 
tion or  distribution  of  products  under  Socialism  is 
according  to  "deeds" — that  is,  every  man  will  receive 
the  product-value  of  his  own  labor. 

But  there  is  a  pronounced  disagreement  among  even 
accepted  Socialist  authorities  in  regard  to  the  last-men- 
tioned point.  There  are,  indeed,  many  different  plans 
proposed,  some  utterly  inconsistent  with  others,  in 
regard  to  the  compensation  of  labor :  both  as  to  the 
basis  of  compensation  and  how  it  should  be  adminis- 
tered, and  also  as  to  how  the  necessaries  of  life,  as  well 
as  luxuries,  should  be  supplied  to  individual  members 
of  the  community.  Some  of  the  greatest  thinkers  among 
the  Socialists — probably  a  majority — concede  that  to 
conserve  the  principle  of  equality  (which  is,  in  theory, 
the  very  soul  of  Socialism),  and  to  prevent  the  re-estab- 
lishment of  "classes,"  it  will  ultimately  be  absolutely 
necessary  to  issue  supplies  "according  to  need,"  if  not 
on  an  equality.  Only  a  few  specimen  authorities  need 
be  quoted : 

Robert  Rlatchford  gives  this  description  in  Merrie 
England  : 

Under  Ideal  Socialism  there  would  he  no  money  at  all,  and 
no  wages  ....  Every  citizen  would  take  what  he  or 
she  desired  from  the  common  stock.  Food,  clothing,  fuel, 
transit,  amusements,  and  all  other  things,  would  be  absolutely 
free. 


46  WHAT   IS    SOCIALISM? 

Spargo,  in  Socialism,  after  laying  it  down  that  "equal- 
ity of  remuneration  is  not  an  essential  condition  of  the 
Socialist  regime,"  goes  on  to  say :  "It  may  be  freely 
admitted,  however,  that  the  ideal  to  be  aimed  at  ulti- 
mately must  be  approximate  equality  of  income.  Other- 
wise, class  formations  must  take  place  and  the  old  prob- 
lems incidental  to  economic  inequality  reappear." 

In  their  famous  "Gotha  Program"  of  1875,  the  Social- 
ist Workingmen's  Party  of  Germany  (the  present  So- 
cial Democracy)  declared :  "As  the  obligation  to  labor 
is  universal,  all  have  an  equal  right  to  such  product  [of 
work],  each  one  according  to  his  reasonable  needs." 

The  brilliant  Mrs.  Annie  Besant  is  now  chiefly  known 
by  reason  of  her  position  as  the  leading  Theosophist 
in  the  world ;  but  the  time  was  when  she  was  almost 
as  well-known  as  a  Socialist — and  so  far  as  known  she 
is  still  a  Socialist.  In  her  contribution  to  the  Fabian 
Essays  she  strongly  insisted  that  inequality  of  division 
would  be  "odious,"  and  that  the  "Communal  Council" 
would  be  driven  "into  the  right  path — equal  remunera- 
tion of  all  workers." 

The  very  highest  authority,  Marx  himself,  undoubt- 
edly held  that  supplies  would  be  furnished  "according 
to  need,"  when  the  system  of  Collectivism  became  ideal. 
He  has  enunciated  two  methods  of  distribution  of  the 
products  of  co-operative  labor,  according  to  the  period 
or  phase  of  Socialism.  Tn  the  Neue  Zcit  (9th  year,  1. 
pp.  566,  567),  Marx  laid  this  down  as  the  program  in 
the  first  period  of  Communist  society : 

In  accordance  with  litis  principle  each  producer  [i.  e., 
laborer,  in  contradistinction  to  capitalists  who  do  not  pro- 
dine]  will  receive  after  deduction  lias  been  made  for  the 
nei  ds  of  the  society — exactly  what  he  has  contributed  to  it. 


WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM?  47 

His  contribution  is  his  individual  share  of  labor.  The  social 
working  day  consists  of  the  total  of  the  individual  hours  of 
labor;  the  individual  labor  time  of  each  producer  is  the 
part  of  the  social  working  day  furnished  by  him;  it  con- 
stitutes his  share.  The  society  will  give  him  a  certificate 
that  be  has  furnished  a  certain  quantity  of  work — after  de- 
ducting bis  work  for  the  common  fund — and  by  showing  lii^ 
certificate  he  will  draw  from  the  society's  stores  an  amount 
of  provisions  equivalent  in  value  to  his  work.  The  amount 
of  work  given  to  the  society  in  one  shape  is  received  again 
in  another. 

[It  will  be  observed  that  Marx  speaks  of  the  Socialist 
Commonwealth  or  State  as  "the  society." 

In  Capital  (vol.  i,  p.  567,  4th  German  ed.)  Marx 
explains  that  during  this  first  period  there  will  not  be 
perfect  equality,  "but  different  individual  talents  and 
capacities  will  be  acknowledged  as  privileges  of  nature. 
.  .  .  In  substance  as  well  as  in  their  nature  rights 
will  be  unequal,  .  .  .  but  these  inconveniences  are 
unavoidable  during  this  first  period  of  communist 
society  which,  after  long  travailing,  is  just  then  issuing 
forth   from  the  womb  of  capitalist  society." 

But,  in  the  second  period  of  Communism,  the  right 
of  each  laborer  to  receive  supplies  "according  to  need" 
will  be  recognized.     For,  says  Marx  (Capital,  vol.  1,  p. 

567): 

In  a  higher  phase  of  communist  society,  after  the  slavish 
subordination  of  the  individual  under  the  divisions  of  labor, 
and  consequently  the  opposition  between  mental  and  bodily 
work  has  disappeared ;  after  labor  has  ceased  to  be  merely 
the  means  of  sustaining  life,  but  has  become  an  urgent  de- 
sire; after  the  individual  has  become  more  perfect  in  every 
respect,  increasing  thereby  also  the  productive  forces  and 
giving  full  play  to  the  fountains  of  co-operative  wealth — then 
only  the  narrow  ordinary  barriers  of  right  and  justice  can  be 


48  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

demolished,  and  society  may  inscribe  upon  its  banner :  Each 
one  according  to  his  abilities,  to  each  one  according  to  his 
needs. 

Keir  Hardy,  M.  P.,  the  apostle  of  the  very  latest 
eclectic  conglomeration  of  differing  Socialist  schools, 
frankly  confesses  in  his  work,  From  Serfdom  to  Social- 
ism, that  Communism  is  "the  final  goal  of  Socialism." 

There  can  be  no  doubt  on  the  part  of  those  familiar 
with  current  thought  and  political  activity  in  the  move- 
ment, that  the  Scotch  Socialist,  J.  Haldane  Smith,  is 
perfectly  correct  when  he  declares  in  his  protesting 
Socialism  or  Communism?  that  "a  conscious  movement 
towards  Communism  is  apparent"  in  the  ranks  of  Brit- 
ish Socialism.  And  this  is  true  of  the  world-wide  move- 
ment, notwithstanding  that  Socialists  protest  that  they 
are  not  Communists. 


CHAPTER    III 

IN    ANCIENT    DAYS 

Aboriginal  Communism. 

Socialism  is  as  old  as  history,  in  the  sense  that  ever 
since  recorded  time  there  have  been  aspirations  and 
struggles  to  attain  the  Ideal  State.  Prof.  LeRossignol 
(University  of  Denver)  observes  in  Orthodox  Social- 
ism that  "the  inequality  of  man  is  the  most  striking 
fact  in  human  history."  The  communal  holding  of 
property  can  be  traced  back  to  the  beginning  of  his- 
tory; but,  so.  also,  can  the  existence  of  private  property. 
The  claim  of  Socialists  that  the  establishment  of  Col- 
lectivism would  only  be  a  reversion  to  original  condi- 
tions is  supported  by  some  eminent  authors,  but  is  ques- 
tioned and  indeed  denied  by  others.  Principally  from 
the  inborn  desire  for  other  men's  possessions,  tribes 
went  to  war,  captives  were  made  slaves,  and  were  looked 
upon  as  chattels ;  and  one  of  the  Marxian  assumptions 
is  that  the  origin  of  capital  was  the  profit  derived  from 
slave  labor.  During  the  evolution  of  primitive  society, 
there  was  common  possession  of  such  things  as  boats 
and  tents  and  articles  of  food,  as  well  as  of  flocks  and 
herds.  When  savagery  gave  place  to  barbarism,  and 
when  the  roaming,  hunting  tribe  developed  into  a  pas- 
toral and  later  on  into  an  agricultural  community,  there 
was   common   possession — or,    rather,    common    occupa- 

49 


50  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

tion  and  use — of  land.  In  time,  the  tribes  confederated 
into  nations ;  and  there  was  an  accompanying  change 
involving  one  of  the  most  important  facts  in  the  whole 
sociological  history  of  man.  During  the  era  of  savagery 
and  in  the  early  period  of  barbarism,  sexual  matters  had 
concerned  the  tribe  rather  than  the  individual  members. 
But,  gradually,  with  the  organization  of  society,  the 
relationship  between  man  and  woman  became  individ- 
ually exclusive  and  mutual.  This  change  marks  the 
beginning  of  a  modification  in  the  principle  of  the  com- 
mon ownership  of  goods ;  and  it  also  marks  the  founda- 
tion of  family  life. 

The  Family  and  Private  Property. 

It  is  not  within  the  province  of  this  work  to  discuss 
the  conflicting  theories  as  to  the  origin  of  the  family  as 
an  institution ;  but  there  can  be  no  denial  of  the  state- 
ment that  family  life  is  intimately  related  to  the  con- 
ception of  private  property,  although  there  is  great  dif- 
ference among  scholars  as  to  whether  the  idea  of  mar- 
riage and  the  family  had  most  to  do  with  the  concep- 
tion of  private  property,  or  vice  versa.  But  it  is  evi- 
dent that  this  idea  and  conception  acted  and  re-acted 
upon  each  other : — that  is,  that  as  marriage  became  rec- 
ognized as  the  normal  relationship  between  man  and 
woman,  and  as  the  family  life  developed,  so  there  grew 
up  a  desire  on  the  part  of  man  for  private  property,  for 
exclusive  use  and  enjoyment ;  and,  on  the  other  hand,  as 
a  man's  private  property  accumulated,  so  likewise  there 
manifested  itself  a  desire  for  a  wife  and  for  children 
to  share  his  possessions.  Some  coldly  logical  Socialists 
accept  it  as  inevitable  that  pure  and  consistent  Collectiv- 
ism must  result  in  a  dissolution  of  the  present  marriage 


IN    ANCIENT   DAYS  51 

relation  and  a  break-up  of  the  existing  family  institu- 
tion ;  and  there  are  those  who,  with  brutal  frankness, 
confess  that  the  greatest  obstacles  to  the  establishment 
of  their  system  are  the  marriage  and  family  ties  as  now 
established — and  that  until  they  are  abolished  it  is  im- 
possible for  genuine,  thorough  Socialism  to  be  estab- 
lished. 

Such  eminent  authorities  as  Emile  de  Laveleye,  Pro- 
fessor of  Political  Economy  at  Liege  (born  1822,  died 
1892),  and  Sir  Henry  Maine,  an  English  jurist  and 
economist  (born  1822,  died  1888),  maintained  that  the 
separate  ownership  of  land  and  chattels  is  of  modern 
growth,  and  that  originally  ownership  was  in  com- 
munities of  kinsmen.  The  theories  of  Maine  as  to 
the  communal  ''villages"  of  India  are  to  this  day  confi- 
dently pointed  to  as  demonstrating  the  practicability 
of  Socialism  so  far  as  the  land  is  concerned.  But  B.  H. 
Baden-Powell,  M.  A.  (Oxford),  is  a  later  authority 
than  Sir  Henry  Maine,  and  he  shows  that  the  latter 
confounded  communal  ownership  with  a  system  of  cul- 
tivation for  the  common  support  of  local  groups.  Fus- 
tel  de  Coulanges,  of  Paris  (born  1830,  died  1889),  left 
an  uncompleted  work  which  is  considered  a  masterly 
refutation  of  Laveleye's  communistic  theories.  He 
argued  that  ancient  property  in  land  was  on  the  seig- 
neurial  rather  than  the  communal  tenure.  "National 
communism,"  he  says,  "has  been  confused  with  the  com- 
mon ownership  of  the  family ;  tenure  in  common  has 
been  confused  with  ownership  in  common;  agrarian 
communism  with  village  commons." 

Holy  Writ  itself  testifies  not  only  as  to  the  establish- 
ment or  recognition  of  private  property  in  land,  but  also 
as    to    its    inheritance.      Jehovah    instructed    Moses    to 


52  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

divide  the  newly-possessed  Land  of  Canaan  for  an 
inheritance  among  his  families,  according  to  their  size. 
The  portion  assigned  to  each  man  became  his  inaliena- 
ble property,  and  descended  in  perpetuity  to  his  heirs ; 
and  by  the  Law  of  Jubilee  the  land  was  restored,  free 
of  encumbrance,  to  the  heirs  of  its  original  holder,  every 
half-century. 

It  has  been  contended  that  the  old  Roman  constitu- 
tion provided  for  equality  of  property  in  land.  But 
Prof.  George  Ferguson,  in  his  article  on  "Agrarian 
Laws"  in  the  Encyclopedia  Britannica,  declares  that  this 
belief,  so  long  held,  is  altogether  erroneous,  and  he  con- 
firms the  conclusion  of  Prof.  Niebuhr,  the  great  Dan- 
ish scholar,  "that  the  agrarian  laws  of  the  Romans  were 
in  no  case  intended  to  interfere  with  or  affect  private 
property  in  land,  but  related  exclusively  to  the  public 
domain." 

Authorities  could  be  multiplied  as  showing  the  anti- 
quity of  the  principle  of  private  ownership,  not  only  in 
land,  but  in  every  class  of  goods — immovable  as  well 
as  portable,  and  that  the  claim  of  Socialists  that  private 
property  is  only  a  modern  institution  is  absolutely  un- 
tenable. 

In  1904  the  University  of  Chicago  Press  published  a 
wonderfully  interesting  book,  The  Code  of  Hammurabi, 
King  of  Babylon,  of  date  about  22*50  B.  C.  The  book- 
gives  facsimiles  of  the  tablets  bearing  the  Code,  in  auto- 
graphed text,  and  in  translations  by  Prof.  Robert  Fran- 
cis Harper.  The  Code  is  a  compilation  of  decrees  of 
Hammurabi,  providing  for  punishment  not  only  for 
offenses  against  the  person,  bul  for  stealing  private 
property,  and  Eor  trespassing  on  private  land,  and  for 
injuries  to  private  fields,  gardens,  and  houses,  etc.     One 


IN    ANCIENT    DAYS  53 

law  reads :  "A  woman,  merchant,  property-holder,  may 
sell  field,  garden,  or  house.  The  purchaser  shall  con- 
duct the  business  of  the  field,  garden,  or  house  which 
he  has  purchased."  There  are  laws  as  to  the  renting-  of 
fields  for  cultivation ;  also  as  to  sub-renting ;  and  there 
are  regulations  as  to  loans  in  which  the  anticipated 
crops  are  pledged  as  security.  Punishment  is  provided 
for  in  cases  of  shepherds  pasturing  flocks  on  fields  with- 
out the  consent  of  the  owners ;  but  a  public  "common" 
is  also  mentioned  by  name.  There  are  also  laws  gov- 
erning the  charge  of  interest  on  loans  of  money ;  fam- 
ily inheritances  are  provided  for;  and  wages  are  named 
for  certain  classes  of  work. 

The  presentation  of  this  phase  of  the  subject  can  be 
closed  with  two  quotations,  one  from  a  Socialist  author- 
ity and  the  other  from  an  anti-Socialist.  The  first,  the 
Encyclopedia  of  Social  Reform,  says,  after  giving  the 
views  of  opposing  writers :  "Some  argue  that  the  cor- 
rect balance  of  truth  is  that  property  was  not  originally 
held  either  by  individuals  or  communally,  but  by  bodies 
of  men  under  some  'strong  man' — despot,  tyrant,  or  at 
best  patriarch.  This  would  be  far  from  communism, 
but  perhaps  equally  far  from  individual  ownership." 
The  second  authority  is  John  Gibbons,  LL.D.  (Chi- 
cago), in  Tenure  and  Toil:  "The  writers  of  ancient 
poetry  and  ancient  history  serve  alike  to  confirm  the 
assertion  that  among  the  Greeks,  Romans,  Phoenicians, 
Carthaginians,  and  Egyptians  the  right  of  private  own- 
ership in  property  existed  from  the  earliest  period  of 
which  we  have  any  definite  data.  In  other  words,  wher- 
ever we  find  a  commercial  people,  we  find  the  right  of 
individual  ownership  in  property  recognized." 


54  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

Examples  of  Ancient  Socialism. 

One  of  the  standard  and  strongest  arguments  against 
Socialism  as  now  understood  is  that  it  is  purely  theo- 
retical— that  the  system  has  never  been  tried.  The  most 
intellectual  and  authoritative  advocates  frankly  concede 
that  this  objection  is  well  taken,  if  the  modern  concep- 
tion of  Socialism  be  accepted ;  but  they  claim  that  there 
are  examples  of  the  Collectivist  idea  or  of  communal 
possession  of  property,  dating  from  the  most  ancient 
times. 

Socialist  literature  is  full  of  references  to  Lycurgus, 
"the  lawgiver  of  Sparta,"  and  to  his  alleged  division  of 
land.  The  tradition  is  that  Lycurgus  brought  over  from 
Crete  the  institutions  of  the  Dorians,  and  redivided 
property  when  he  established  a  new  civil  constitution. 
It  is  said  that  he  parceled  out  Laconia  into  39,000  equal 
lots,  9,000  lots  being  assigned  to  Spartan  citizens.  In 
a  very  remarkable  work  by  C.  Osborne  Ward  (a  gov- 
ernment official  at  Washington,  D.  C),  The  Ancient 
Lowly,  it  is  claimed  that  under  a  system  established  by 
Lycurgus,  the  Spartans  practiced  communal  ownership 
from  825  to  371  13.  C.  Mr.  Ward  says  that  there  was 
not  only  common  property,  common  education,  and  com- 
mon eating — but  that  commerce  was  interdicted,  and 
that  stealing  was  authorized ! 

But  scholarly  Socialists  do  not  lay  much  stress  upon 
the  story  of  Lycurgus  and  his  division  of  land.  They 
recognize  that  it  is  but  a  tradition  at  the  best,  and  even 
if  true  bears  but  little  relation  to  the  modern  idea  of 
Socialism,  and  cannot,  therefore,  be  cited  as  a  demon- 
stration of  its  practicability. 


IN    ANCIENT   DAYS  55 

Athenian  Socialism. 

Of  the  instances  of  ancient  Socialism,  so-called,  of 
more  or  less  authenticity,  none  is  pointed  to  so  confi- 
dently and  with  so  much  pride,  as  the  case  of  classic 
Athens.  But  it  should  be  kept  in  mind  that  the  Social- 
ism of  Athens  was  only  for  the  free  citizens : — that  it 
did  not  benefit  the  slaves,  although  historians  agree  that 
the  Athenians  treated  their  slaves  better  than  the  Ro- 
mans did.  There  are  a  number  of  estimates  of  the  num- 
ber of  slaves  in  proportion  to  the  free  citizens  in 
Athens ;  it  is  generally  put  down  as  three  slaves  to  one 
free  man.  It  is  claimed  that  Socialism  was  virtually 
tried  in  Athens,  under  Pericles,  the  greatest  of  all  Gre- 
cian statesmen,  who  flourished  in  the  fifth  century 
before  Christ.  Dr.  Bliss  quotes  authorities  in  his  ency- 
clopedia declaring  that  this  was  the  period  of  Greece's 
greatest  glory,  and  that  it  produced  men  of  unequalled 
ability — and  this  the  editor  of  the  Encyclopedia  of 
Social  Reform  attributes  to  Socialism.  In  view  of  the 
current  discussion  in  regard  to  the  Communism  of 
Modern  Socialism,  and  especially  as  to  rewards  of  labor 
under  the  Collective  Commonwealth,  it  is  interesting 
a  note  that  Dr.  Bliss,  in  an  article  in  The  Outlook  (New 
York),  says  that  the  Socialism  of  classic  Athens  prac- 
tically asked  from  each  citizen  labor  according  to  his 
ability,  and  of  the  product  gave  to  each  according  to 
his  need;  and  this  is  the  pure  Marxian  conception 
of  ideal  Socialism.  Two  institutions  in  the  main  accom- 
plished this:  one  was  called  the  "liturgies,"  and  took 
from  the  rich  for  the  benefit  of  the  poor;  and  the  other 
was  called  the  "dicasticon,"  which  was  payment  in 
money,  daily,  for  public  service  (assumedly),  given  to 
any  citizen  who  wanted  it,  practically,  and  in  an  amount 


56  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

sufficient  to  enable  him  to  live  upon  it  in  respectability 
and  comfort.  It  was  the  latter  institution,  Dr.  Bliss 
says,  which,  more  than  anything  else,  made  Athens  a 
Socialist  State.  There  were  a  great  many  law  courts 
in  Athens,  and  citizens  were  paid  daily  amounts  for  per- 
forming jury  service ;  and  they  also  received  pay  for 
attending  the  popular  assemblies,  and  for  witnessing  the 
elaborate  religious  ceremonies  and  rites,  which  were 
conducted  and  maintained  by  the  State.  The  temples, 
baths,  gymnasia,  theatres,  markets,  etc.,  were  built  and 
managed  by  the  State.  The  arts  were  cared  for  by  the 
State,  and  the  wonderful  and  incomparable  Parthenon 
and  Acropolis  were  the  creation  of  State  artists.  Gold 
and  silver  mines,  and  the  slaves  who  worked  them,  were 
owned  by  the  State;  and  thus  were  supplied  the  official 
revenues,  instead  of  by  taxation.  Commerce  and  trade 
were  usually  left  to  slaves,  while  the  free-born  citizens 
(Socialists!)  "reaped  the  usufruct,"  and  devoted  them- 
selves to  "higher  things."  Notwithstanding  the  brilliant 
civilization  of  Athens,  she  fell — and  deservedly  so.  Dr. 
Bliss  admits  that  Socialist  (  !)  Athens  was  immoral  and 
corrupt,  and  that  its  family  life  was  impure.  The  con- 
dition of  Athens  under  so-called  Socialism  was  even 
worse  than  Dr.  Bliss  admits.  T.  G.  Frazier,  in  an  arti- 
cle in  the  Encyclopedia  Britannica,  writes: 

According  to  Plato,  it  was  a  common  saying  that  Pericles, 
by  the  system  of  payments  which  he  introduced,  had  cor- 
rupted  the  Athenians,  rendering  them  idle,  cowardly,  talka- 
tive, and  avaricious.  It  was  Pericles  who  introduced  the 
payment  of  jurymen,  and  as  there  were  6,000  of  them  told  off 
annually  for  duty,  of  whom  a  great  pari  sat  daily,  the  dis- 
bursement  from  the  treasury  was  great,  while  the  poor  and 
idle  were  encouraged  to  live  at  the  public  expense.  .  .  . 
It  was  pari  of  the  policy  of  Pericles  at  once  to  educate  and 


IN    ANCIENT    DAYS  57 

delight  the  people  by  numerous  and  splendid  festivals,  pro- 
cessions, and  shows.  But  the  good  was  mixed  with  seeds  of 
evil,  which  took  root  and  spread,  till,  in  the  days  of  Demos- 
thenes, the  money  which  should  have  been  spent  in  fighting 
the  enemies  of  Athens  was  squandered  in  spectacles  and 
pageants.  The  spectacular  fund  or  Thcorikon  has  been  called 
the  cancer  of  Athens. 

The  "Solonic  Law." 

American  Socialists  quote  extensively  from  the  work 
by  C.  Osborne  Ward,  The  Ancient  Lowly,  which  sets 
forth  the  most  remarkable  alleged  discoveries  by  the 
author  as  to  the  antiquity  of  Trade  Unions  and  Social- 
ism. Mr.  Ward  is  an  avowed  Socialist,  and  his  state- 
ments have  all  the  animus  of  an  extreme  partisan.  The 
evidence  which  he  presents  he  says  he  unearthed  from 
old  manuscripts,  tablets,  chiselled  records,  and  relics, 
in  ancient  cities  and  ruins  in  Italy  and  Greece,  which  he 
affirms  were  heretofore  unknown  or  had  been  systemat- 
ically smothered  or  ignored  by  other  writers.  Much 
space  is  given  by  Mr.  Ward  to  what  is  called  the 
"Solonic  Law."  Solon  was  a  very  wise  man  of  Greece, 
and  lived  about  600  years  before  Christ.  He  had  the 
confidence  of  his  fellow-citizens,  and  they  made  him 
"Archon,"  or  Chief  Magistrate.  The  money  lenders 
were  eating  up  the  substance  of  the  land,  and  the  small 
farms  were  plentifully  sprinkled  with  "mortgage  pil- 
lars;" and  Solon's  first  act  as  "Archon"  was  to  annul 
all  mortgages,  by  having  the  pillars  thrown  down.  This 
proceeding  was  deemed  justifiable  because  the  terms 
of  the  money  lenders  were  unfair  and  oppressive;  but 
there  was  no  redistribution  or  confiscation  of  the  land. 
Solon's  next  great  reform  was  the  reconstruction  of  the 
political  system  on  the  principle  that  every  citizen  was 


58  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

entitled  to  share  in  the  government  of  the  country. 
Solon  is  said  to  be  the  father  of  universal  suffrage — 
that  is,  as  regards  free  citizens.  But  he  realized  that 
the  people  were  not  ready  for  "pure"  democracy;  he 
made  property  the  measure  of  political  power,  and  he 
confined  the  higher  offices  of  State  to  the  wealthy  citi- 
zens. From  them  he  made  a  Council  of  Four  Hundred ; 
— and  the  origin  of  the  term  "Four  Hundred"  as  ap- 
plied to  the  wealthy,  exclusive  "set"  of  New  York,  is 
no  doubt  from  this  Solonic  law.  But  Mr.  Ward  goes  far 
beyond  what  the  above  would  indicate  as  to  the  char- 
acter of  Solon  and  his  historic  decrees.  He  pictures 
Solon — almost  to  the  exclusion  of  anything  else — as 
being  the  organizer  of  the  proletarians,  not  only  of 
Greece,  but  of  the  world  as  it  was  then  known,  first  as 
Trade  Unionists,  and  then  as  members  of  organizations 
forming  parts  of  an  universal  scheme  of  Socialism ! 
Mr.  Ward  claims  that  the  Solonic  Law  provided  for 
a  common  table,  and  that  the  Trade  Unions  held  prop- 
erty in  common  and  followed  a  communal  code.  The 
system  under  Solon  appears  to  have  been  very  much 
"mixed,"  according  to  Mr.  Ward.  The  free  citizens 
owned  private  property,  but  the  members  of  the  Trade 
Unions  were  not  citizens,  and  a  large  proportion  of 
them  were  slaves.  Their  right  of  combination  was 
given  to  them  by  Solon.  While  their  plan  of  organiza- 
tion was  economic  rather  than  political,  when  originally 
organized,  yet  at  the  time  of  Christ  il  was  political,  and 
they  endorsed  Christianity.  Says  this  most  astounding 
author:  "There  are  reasonable  grounds  for  believing 
that  the  original  founders  of  Christianity,  including  the 
Master  Himself,  were  initiates  into  the  secret  penetra- 
lia of  tin's  vast  order!"     These  Trade  Unions,  accord- 


IN    ANCIENT    DAYS  59 

ing  to  Mr.  Ward,  represented  "pure,  scientific  Social- 
ism"—and  had  the  movement  continued  uninterrupt- 
edly, the  millenium  would  long  before  this  have  arrived! 
It  is  asserted  that  the  Syrians  tried  to  break  up  this 
wonderful  Socialist  system,  but  were  not  able  to  do  so, 
and  the  work  of  destruction  was  then  undertaken  by 
the  Romans !  And  finally  Solonic  Socialism  was  killed  by 
Diocletian,  the  Roman  Emperor,  in  the  third  century 
after  Christ.  Some  Socialists  seriously  quote  this  jum- 
ble of  tradition  and  imagination  as  historic  proof  of  the 
practicability  of  Socialism ! 

In  Peru,  Mexico  and  Elsewhere. 

There  was  an  enforced  system  of  Communism  among 
the  original  inhabitants  of  Peru,  the  Aztecs,  in  the  days 
when  they  were  lorded  over  by  the  Incas.  The  system 
of  government  was  a  pure  despotic  theocracy.  The 
great  mass  of  the  Aztecs  were  serfs,  and  they  were 
compelled  to  labor.  In  the  hamlets  and  villages  a  man 
mounted  a  tower  every  evening  and  announced  where 
and  how  the  Aztecs  serfs  were  to  work  the  next  daw 
Labor  was  in  common,  individual  property  among  the 
Aztecs  was  abolished,  and  every  detail  in  daily  life 
was  prescribed,  according  to  fixed  rules,  the  people 
being  mere  machines,  governed  by  an  immense  staff 
of  civil  and  religious  officers.  It  is  not  to  be  wondered 
at  that  the  Peruvians  fell  an  easy  prey  to  their  Spanish 
invaders.  And  yet  some  Socialists  say  that  the  Peru- 
vian experiment  justifies  the  claim  that  Socialism  is 
feasible ! 

In  Mexico,  centuries  ago,  there  was  a  communism  in 
land  among  the  aborigines,  the  majority  of  whom  were 
serfs,   and   were   transferred    with   the    soil    which    they 


60  WHAT   IS    SOCIALISM? 

worked.  The  peasants  and  the  slaves  of  the  nobles 
were  allowed  a  certain  portion  of  land,  which  they  cul- 
tivated in  common,  for  their  subsistence ;  and  the  sur- 
plus of  what  they  produced  they  had  to  turn  over  to 
their  masters. 

Alfred  Stead,  in  Great  Japan,  says  that  there  are  now 
in  existence  several  Socialist  communities  within  the 
Empire  of  the  East,  and  that  in  one  of  these  divisions 
the  "single  tax"  has  been  in  existence  for  centuries. 
This  community  levies  all  taxes  on  land,  but  at  certain 
periods — of  eleven,  thirteen,  or  seventeen  years — the 
land  is  impartially  apportioned  among  the  people.  Mr. 
Stead  gives  a  detailed  account  of  the  system  of  Social- 
ism which  is  said  to  have  been  in  force  for  centuries — 
and  is  still  in  force — in  the  Prefecture  of  Okinawa, 
which  is  comprised  of  thirty-six  islands,  their  combined 
size  being  170  square  miles,  and  their  population  being 
170,000.  In  addition  to  the  private  allotments  of  land, 
made  as  above  stated,  the  community  own  a  large  tract 
of  common  land,  on  which  they  plant  banana  trees ;  and 
the  trees  are  carefully  preserved  so  that  the  fruit  can 
be  used  by  all  the  people  in  case  of  a  famine.  There 
is  not  a  landlord  on  the  whole  of  the  islands.  Mr.  Stead 
is  of  the  opinion  that  in  all  probability  Socialism  of  a 
modified  form  will  soon  be  introduced  by  the  national 
government  of  Japan  ;  but  he  thinks  that  in  that  coun- 
try it  is  likely  to  develop  along  lines  vastly  different 
from  those  followed  elsewhere. 

In  many  parts  of  the  world  there  have  been  "common" 
lands,  existing  from  the  earliest  dawn  of  civilization. 
I  ' r  1  <  1  < •  r  the  ancient  laws  of  Ireland,  tribes  had  common 
possession  of  "live"  and  "dead"  chattels,  as  well  as 
land;   and    Prof.    Leslie,   of    Belfast,   in   his  great   work, 


IN    ANCIENT    DAYS  61 

Primitive  Property,  says  that  these  ancient  laws  indicate 
that  women  were  not  only  held  as  chattels  but  were 
held  as  such  in  common  by  clans  and  "septs"  (joint 
families),  and  by  smaller  groups  of  kinsmen.  There 
are  ancient  legal  records  of  the  original  co-ownership 
and  common  cultivation  of  the  soil  of  Denmark  and 
Holstein  by  village  communities.  In  England,  groups 
of  husbandmen  cultivated  the  ground  and  fed  their 
flocks  and  herds  on  a  co-operative  system  which  bears 
all  the  marks  of  descent  from  the  primitive  communal 
usages  of  the  Teutonic  race. 

Alone  among  the  countries  of  the  world,  Switzerland 
has  maintained  free  political  institutions  and  a  system 
of  communal  possession  of  land  contemporaneously,  this 
system  antedating  feudalism : — the  "Allmend,"  which 
is  not  extensive,  and  has  hereditary  features.  "All- 
mend"  means  "the  domain  common  to  all."  But  the 
system  is  disintegrating  under  the  influence  of  modern 
civilization  ;  the  communal  land  is  now  leased  by  pub- 
lic auction,  and — contrary  to  ancient  principles — 
strangers  as  well  as  citizens  can  now  lease  the  land. 
There  is  a  similar  system  in  some  of  the  mountainous 
districts  of  France. 

The  Russian  institution  of  the  "Mir"  is  frequently 
referred  to  as  an  example  of  the  advantages  of  Col- 
lectivism, but  the  claim  will  not  bear  investigation.  All 
land  in  Russia  which  is  not  owned  by  the  Crown  or  the 
nobility  is  the  common  property  of  the  community ; 
and  the  aggregate  of  the  inhabitants  of  a  village  pos- 
sessing the  land  in  common  is  known  as  a  "Mir,"  which 
is  ancient  Russian  for  "commune."  In  theory,  every 
male  villager  of  legal  age  has  an  equal  share  in  the 
"Mir."     Formerly  there  was  common  cultivation  in  the 


62  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

"Mir,"  but  that  custom  has  long  been  abandoned,  and 
now  the  common  land  is  divided  into  small  plots  and 
is  distributed  among  the  villages  by  lot  or  otherwise. 
But  the  institution  is  very  unsatisfactory,  especially 
under  modern  conditions ;  and  the  "Mir"  and  the  exten- 
sive system  of  "Municipal  Socialism"  in  Russia  have 
paralyzed  individual  initiative  and  enterprise.  The  vil- 
lagers do  not  feel  that  they  have  any  permanent  inter- 
est in  any  one  piece  of  land,  and  they  therefore  only 
cultivate  it  in  "hand-to-mouth"  style;  they  do  not  ma- 
nure it  properly,  neither  do  they  provide  for  rotation 
of  crops ;  and  they  only  make  such  improvements  as 
immediate  necessities  compel.  Not  only  has  the  system 
resulted  in  the  impoverishment  of  the  land,  but  of  the 
tenants  as  well,  they  being  almost  universally  and  hope- 
lessly in  debt. 

In  ancient  Germany  the  village  "Marke"  possessed 
features  analogous  to  the  Russian  "Mir."  With  the 
exception  of  the  houses  and  orchards,  everything  was 
held  in  common,  the  land  being  divided  into  plots,  and 
after  being  cultivated  for  a  year,  was  allowed  to  "lie 
fallow"  for  a  number  of  years. 

When  the  Dutch  went  to  Java  they  found  a  system 
of  collective  ownership  and  cultivation  practiced  by  the 
natives.  The  Dutch  have  continued  the  system  with 
modifications,  which  include  the  relations  of  the  laborers 
to  the  State;  in  the  old  days  the  labor  was  forced,  and 
even  at  the  present  time  its  status  is  very  low. 

The  apostle  of  Modern  Socialism  cannot  find  any  sat- 
isfactory precedent  for  Collectivism  in  the  ancient  exam- 
ples: they  were  all  utterly   incompatible  with   the  spirit 


IN    ANCIENT   DAYS  63 

of  modern  times ;  in  some  instances  they  were  based  on 
slavery ;  and  in  the  most  conspicuous  case,  so-called 
Socialism  was  the  direct  cause  of  national  ruin.  Social- 
ism has  yet  to  justify  its  extravagant  claims  by  a  single 
successful   experiment. 


CHAPTER    IV 

LABOR'S    ATTITUDE 

Trade  Unionism  versus  Socialism. 

Although  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  majority  of 
Socialists  are  Trade  Unionists — except  in  such  coun- 
tries as  Russia,  where  organized  Labor  is  almost  un- 
known— it  is  a  notable  fact  that  the  two  movements 
represented  are  often  antagonistic.  The  relation  be- 
tween Socialism  and  Trade  Unionism  differs  in  differ- 
ent countries.  In  non-democratic  countries,  such  as 
Italy  and  Spain,  there  is  practically  no  difference,  while 
in  the  most  democratic  country,  the  United  States,  there 
is  the  most  pronounced  difference  which  exists  in  any 
country.  In  Germany,  Trade  Unionists  are  divided  into 
Roman  Catholic,  Protestant,  and  purely  secular  organ- 
izations— the  most  numerous  being  the  latter.  The  sec- 
ular bodies  are  practically  all  Socialist,  while  those 
organized  on  a  distinctively  Christian  basis  are  anti- 
Socialist.  As  a  rule,  Trade  Unionism  and  Socialism 
practically  mean  the  same  thing  on  the  Continent 
(except  in  cases  in  which  the  former  is  organized  on  a 
religious  basis)  :  there  may  be  two  separate  bodies,  but 
they  run  in  parallel  grooves,  one  body  working  specif- 
ically on  trade  lines,  while  the  other  devotes  itself  to  the 
political  side  of  the  proletarian  movement;  and  on 
occasions  both  currents  of  agitation  and  action  will 
coalesce  for  one  mutual  purpose. 

64 


LABOR'S    ATTITUDE  65 

In  England  and  America  there  has  been  in  the  past  a 
clearly-marked  cleavage  between  Socialism  and  Trade 
Unionism ;  but  within  recent  years  there  has  been  a 
closing-up  of  the  gap  in  England ;  and  there  are  devel- 
opments in  the  same  direction  in  the  United  States. 

British  Politics  and  Trade  Unionism. 

There  are  four  well-marked  periods  of  development 
in  the  history  of  the  British  Trade  Union  movement : 
(1)  that  of  the  origin  of  trade  societies,  gradually  be- 
coming permanent,  and  composed  exclusively  of  jour- 
neymen who  were  wage  earners;  (2)  a  revolutionary 
period,  when  the  Unions  were  fighting  against  the  bar- 
barous legislation  of  Parliament,  and  were  struggling 
to  secure  the  legal  right  to  combine  and  to  make  "col- 
lective bargains;"  (3)  an  era  of  conservative  construc- 
tion, and  of  growth  into  strong  beneficial  societies,  a 
policy  of  non-participation  in  politics  being  generally 
observed;  (4)  that  of  the  present  time — of  the  "new" 
Unionism,  the  Labor  organizations  abandoning  to  a 
great  extent  their  past  policy  of  political  neutrality,  and 
affiliating  with  societies  and  movements  outside  their 
own  special  sphere,  this  alliance  being  for  the  accom- 
plishment of  specific  political  and  economic  ends — even 
including  the  "ultimate  aim"  of  Modern  Socialism,  the 
communal  ownership  and  control  of  the  means  of  pro- 
duction and  distribution.  And  it  is  significant  that 
while  British  Labor-Socialists  are  keenly  "Opportun- 
ist." they  are  generally  to  be  numbered  amongst  the 
most  extravagant  of  the  Socialist  brotherhood  as  to 
their  declared  economic  objects — to  be  attained,  how- 
ever, by  peaceful  methods.  But  there  are,  it  should  be 
noted,  already  symptoms  of  a  revolt  or  reaction  against 


66  WHAT   IS    SOCIALISM? 

the  "new"  Trade  Unionism.  During  the  year  1910 
there  was  a  revolt  on  the  part  of  Conservative  and 
other  anti-Socialist  trade  unionists  against  being  com- 
pelled to  pay  assessments  for  the  election  expenses  and 
salaries  of  Labor-Socialist  members  of  Parliament,  and 
one  of  them  named  Osborne  secured  from  the  courts  a 
decision  which  has  become  famous  under  his  name,  lay- 
ing down  the  principle  that  as  trade  union  funds  are 
partly  beneficial  in  their  character  they  cannot  be  used 
for  political  purposes,  and  that  a  member  cannot  be 
expelled  from  his  union  for  refusing  to  pay  the  special 
assessment. 

Up  to  a  certain  point,  the  history  of  the  Trade  Union 
movement  in  the  United  States  shows  the  same  phases 
of  development,  except  that  they  are  not  so  definitely 
marked  as  in  Great  Britain,  principally  for  the  reason 
that  there  has  not  been  such  a  pronounced  difference 
between  the  employers  and  the  working  people  of  the 
new  as  in  the  older  country. 

The  modern  Trade  Union,  as  the  term  is  understood 
in  America  and  England,  is  an  organization  of  wage 
earners  exclusively;  and  herein  it  differs  in  principle 
from  the  ancient  trade  guild,  which  was  composed  of 
craftsmen  who  owned  the  means  of  production,  and 
oftentimes  the  raw  material ;  and  yet  Trade  Unions 
existed  anterior  to  the  establishment  of  the  factory  sys- 
tem. It  is  a  popular  supposition  that  the  modern  Trade 
Union  is  the  descendant  of  the  old  trade  guild;  but  the 
1.'  t  authorities  say  that  this  is  an  error.  In  England, 
as  in  America,  Unions  have  been  primarily  and  until 
recently  almost  exclusively  devoted  to  trade  matters, 
tin-  motto  of  the  workingmen  of  the  two  countries 
being    "No    politics    in    the    Union!"      Still,    organized 


LABOR'S    ATTITUDE  67 

Labor  in  both  countries  has  always  strenuously  fought 
for  legislation  directly  in  its  own  interest ;  and  in  the 
last  Presidential  campaign  (1908)  the  American  Fed- 
eration of  Labor,  which  by  its  constitution  is  inhibited 
from  taking  political  action,  openly — in  an  official  sense 
— supported  the  Democratic  candidate,  on  the  principle 
of  "helping  our  friends  and  fighting  our  enemies." 

During  the  year  1909  the  British  Government  at- 
tempted to  sweep  away  "sweated"  labor,  not  only  by 
prescribing  the  conditions  under  which  certain  kinds  of 
industry  must  be  performed,  but  by  establishing  a  "min- 
imum wage."  This  has  been  denounced  as  "rank  So- 
cialism ;"  and  so  it  is,  in  a  manner ;  but  it  is  only  a 
reversion  to  the  ancient  British  policy  of  State  interfer- 
ence with  the  relations  between  employer  and  employed, 
the  difference  being,  however,  that  while  formerly  the 
object  of  the  law  was  chiefly  to  keep  Labor  down  to 
the  lowest  possible  condition,  the  object  now  is  to  raise 
the  wages  and  the  general  environment.  The  famous — 
or  rather,  infamous — "Statute  of  Laborers,"  passed  in 
the  reign  of  Edward  the  Third  (1327-1377),  enacted 
that  no  person  was  to  pay  more  than  the  old  wages, 
although  the  price  of  provisions  had  increased  very 
much ;  and  employers  who  paid  more  than  the  pre- 
scribed rate  were  to  be  fined  treble  the  amount  paid  or 
promised,  while  artificers  and  laborers  were  to  be  put 
in  jail  if  they  accepted  more  than  the  schedule  wages. 
Magna  Charta  affected  freemen  alone,  and  at  the  time 
of  King  John  it  is  probable  that  nearly  one-half  of  the 
entire  population  of  England  were  in  a  state  of  slavery; 
and  on  the  Continent,  not  only  was  the  proportion  of 
slaves  greater  than  in  England,  but  their  condition  was 
much  worse.     Hume,  the  historian,  describes  the  con- 


68  WHAT   IS    SOCIALISM? 

dition  of  the  working  classes  of  Europe  in  ancient  days 
as  the  most  important  difference  between  the  social  life 
then  and  in  modern  times.  During  the  period  of  serf- 
dom there  was  no  "working  class,"  as  the  term  is  under- 
stood now — that  is,  there  were  no  free  laborers  who 
did  not  own  the  means  of  production  and  who  worked 
for  a  stated  wage.  ^  Consumers  and  owners  provided 
the  raw  material,  and  they  hired  craftsmen  direct;  arti- 
sans were  also  kept  regularly  among  the  servants  of 
the  wealthy;  the  villeins  (serfs)  tilled  the  soil,  and 
workmen  in  towns  lived  in  the  shop  of  their  employer 
— a  system  still  surviving  in  London  with  shop  assist- 
ants, but  fast  disappearing,  the  custom  now  being 
known  as  "living  in."  The  capitalist-employer,  the  first 
middleman,  was  not  known  until  the  seventh  century ; 
and  the  capitalist-purchaser  of  raw  materials  came 
later.  Capitalist-artisans  developed  in  the  sixteenth  cen- 
tury— that  is,  they  became  the  purchasers  of  the  raw 
materials  upon  which  they  exercised  their  handicraft  skill ; 
and  in  course  of  time  they  grew  prosperous,  accumulated 
capital,  and  ceased  working  at  their  trades  themselves, 
and  became  "bosses,"  employing  their  former  comrades 
in  the  industry  who  had  not  been  as  fortunate  as  they 
had  been. 

"Classes"  began  to  arise  in  trade ;  and  the  non- 
working  capitalist  made  his  appearance.  From  the 
end  of  the  fourteenth  century  down  to  the  repeal  of 
the  anti-combination  laws  the  whole  spirit  of  British 
legislation  was  that  of  oppo  itioxi  to  the  working  classes; 
and  Prof.  Rogers  says  (Six  Centuries  of  Labor  and 
Wages)  that  fur  fifteen  or  sixteen  generations  there 
was  no  ap]  ble  improvement  in  the  condition  of  the 

people.     In   [562  the  Statute  of  Laborers  was  amended, 


LABOR'S    ATTITUDE  69 

and  a  new  rate  of  wages  was  laid  down,  it  being  ad- 
mitted in  the  new  Act  itself  that  the  old  rate  was  too 
low  in  several  particulars.  This  extraordinary  Statute 
prohibited  Labor  combinations  throughout  its  entire 
continuance.  It  was  not  actually  repealed  until  1875, 
and  then  the  last  vestige  of  feudalism — that  is,  as  it 
affected  human  liberty — was  swept  from  the  British 
statute  books,  although  long  before  that  time  practically 
all  trace  of  the  old  servitude  system  had  disappeared. 

Slowly  the  Trade  Unionists  entered  the  political 
arena: — first  to  obtain  legislation  directly  affecting  them 
as  wage  earners  in  their  particular  trade;  and  then  in 
time  the  field  of  political  agitation  widened,  and  the 
extension  of  the  franchise  and  a  national  system  of  edu- 
cation were  taken  up. 

The  "Taff  Vale  Decision." 

In  July,  1901,  the  British  House  of  Lords  delivered 
the  famous  "Taff  Vale  decision,"  which  has  had  far- 
reaching  and  unlooked-for  results.  The  immediate 
effect  was  to  cause  Trade  Unionists  generally  to  enter 
politics,  not  only  individually,  but  collectively  and 
officially,  as  Unions ;  and  the  ultimate  consequence  was 
virtually  to  cause  an  alliance  between  the  Trade  Union- 
ists, as  such,  with  the  Socialists; — or,  possibly  a  more 
correct  way  to  state  the  case  is  to  say  that  it  led  to  the 
capture  of  the  British  Trade  Unions  by  the  out-and-out 
Socialists.  And  finally,  the  outcome  of  the  public  agita- 
tion and  the  Parliamentary  pressure  of  the  combined 
forces  of  Labor  and  Socialism,  was  the  passage  of  the 
"Trades  Dispute  Act,"  in  1906, — a  law  which  specially 
favors  Trade  Unionists  above  their  fellow-citizens.  This 
law  and  the  causes  which  led  to  its  passage  are  so  mo- 


70  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

mentous,  that  they  call  for  a  statement  somewhat  in 
detail — especially  as  that  Act  is  held  to  be  largely 
responsible  for  the  extraordinary  outburst  of  violence 
in  the  dock  and  railroads  strikes  of  191 1. 

In  August,  1  goo,  there  was  a  strike  on  the  Taff  Vale 
Railway,  in  South  Wales,  the  strikers  being  members 
of  the  Amalgamated  Society  of  Railway  Servants.  A 
suit  was  brought  against  members  of  the  Union  for 
persuading  and  intimidating  workmen  to  break  their 
contracts  with  the  railroad  company,  and  for  aiding  and 
abetting  violence ;  and  the  court  awarded  damages  to 
the  extent  of  £23,000  (about  $115,000).  At  first  the 
railway  company  had  sued  the  members  of  the  Union 
individually,  but,  under  a  ruling  of  the  court,  the  Amal- 
gamated Society  of  Railway  Servants  was  made  a  party 
to  the  suit.  On  the  award  of  the  damages  the  Union 
appealed,  and  the  decision  was  reversed ;  then  the  rail- 
way company  appealed  to  the  highest  tribunal,  the 
House  of  Lords ; — and  the  decision  of  the  first  court 
was  sustained.  This  decision,  confirmed  by  the  supreme 
judicial  authority  in  the  British  Empire,  did  not  affect 
Trade  Unions  in  a  criminal  sense,  but  it  held  that  they 
were  not  fully  incorporated,  and  that  they  could  be 
sued  and  cast  in  damages  for  the  action  of  their  agents, 
whenever  this  action  was  without  justification  and 
caused  damage  to  other  persons.  Incidentally,  it  may 
be  mentioned  thai  the  strike  was  entered  into  by  mem- 
bers of  the  LJnion  contrary  to  the  wishes  of  the  execu- 
tive, although  subsequently  the  Union  supported  it. 
The  I  louse  of  Lords  held  that  the  members  of  the 
Union  were  liable  individually  and  that  the  association 
itself  was  also  liable; — and  it  was  on  the  latter  holding 
that  the  Amalgamated  Society  of  Railwaj  Servants  was 


LABOR'S    ATTITUDE  71 

compelled  to  pay  £23,000  damages  to  the  Taff  Vale 
Railway  Co.  Not  for  many  years  had  any  decision 
of  the  highest  court  caused  such  a  sensation  and  popu- 
lar protest.  While  the  case  was  in  the  lower  court — 
but  before  a  decision  had  been  rendered — the  Trade 
Unions  had  recognized  its  importance ;  and  the  National 
Congress  of  Unions  issued  an  invitation  to  Labor  and 
Socialists  societies  to  join  together  in  the  formation  of 
a  "Labor  Representation  Committee,"  which  was  formed 
in  1900.  and  is  a  political  committee  to  indorse  and  sup- 
port Labor  candidates  nominated  by  its  constituent 
Unions  and  societies.  It  is  now  the  Labor  Party,  and 
is  practically  a  Socialist  organization.  The  following 
are  the  principal  clauses  of  the  Trades  Disputes  Act, 
passed  in  1906 — primarily  for  the  express  purpose  of 
changing  the  law  as  laid  down  by  the  House  of  Lords 
in  the  Taff  Vale  decision — against  most  bitter  protests 
on  the  part  of  the  business  and  conservative  elements 
of  the  country ;  and  it  is  important  to  bear  in  mind  that 
American  organized  Labor  demands  similar  legislation: 

1.  An  act  done  in  pursuance  of  an  agreement  or  combina- 
tion by  two  or  more  persons  shall,  if  done  in  contemplation 
nr  furtberance  of  a  trade  dispute,  not  be  actionable  unless  the 
act,  if  done  without  any  agreement  or  combination,  would 
be  actionable. 

2.  It  shall  be  lawful  for  one  or  more  persons,  acting  on 
their  own  behalf  or  on  behalf  of  a  trade  union,  or  of  an 
individual  employer  or  firm  in  contemplation  or  furtherance 
of  a  trade  dispute,  to  attend  at  or  near  the  house  or  place 
where  a  person  resides  or  works  or  carries  on  business  or 
happens  to  be,  if  they  so  attend  merely  for  the  purpose  of 
peacefully  obtaining  or  communicating  information,  or  of 
peacefully  persuading  any  person  to  work  or  abstain  from 
working. 


72  WHAT   IS    SOCIALISM? 

3.  An  act  done  by  a  person  in  contemplation  of  furtherance 
of  a  trade  dispute  shall  not  be  actionable  on  the  ground  only 
that  it  induces  some  other  person  to  break  a  contract  of 
employment  or  that  it  is  an  interference  with  the  trade,  busi- 
ness, or  employment  of  some  other  person,  or  with  the  right 
of  some  other  person  to  dispose  of  his  capital  or  his  labor 
as  he  wills. 

4.  An  action  against  a  trade  union,  whether  of  workmen 
or  masters,  or  against  any  members  or  officials  thereof  on 
behalf  of  themselves  and  all  other  members  of  the  trade 
union  in  respect  of  any  tortious  act  alleged  to  have  been  com- 
mitted by  or  on  behalf  of  the  trade  union,  shall  not  be  enter- 
tained by  any  court. 

Labor   Revolt,   August,    191 1. 

The  month  of  August,  191 1,  saw  the  greatest  Labor 
strike  in  British  history,  and  it  was  accompanied  by 
such  violence  as  to  border  on  civil  war.  The  trouble 
commenced  by  strikes  of  seamen,  followed  by  dockers, 
both  of  which  classes  of  workers  received  substantial 
concessions  as  a  result  of  their  revolt  against  condi- 
tions which  were  intolerable  from  an  American  stand- 
point; but  the  victory  was  sullied  by  dastardly  personal 
outrages  and  destruction  of  property.  While  these 
strikes  were  in  progress,  the  railroad  men  "came  out" 
on  demands  for  the  redress  of  grievances  and  the  recog- 
nition of  the  union,  and  in  so  doing  they  plainly  vio- 
lated an  agreement  they  had  entered  into,  under  the 
Conciliatory  Act  of  1907.  An  epidemic  of  "sympa- 
thetic" strikes  broke  out  all  over  the  country,  and  an 
avowed  attempt  was  made  to  paralyze  all  industry  and 
to  starve  the  nation  into  recognition  of  the  demands. 
The  Government  were  compelled  to  use  regular  troops 
in  London,  Liverpool  and  other  large  cities  and  a  num- 
ber of  sanguinary  conflicts  occurred,  in  which  several 


LABOR'S    ATTITUDE  73 

lives  were  lost.  In  Wales  assaults  were  made  upon 
the  Jews,  on  the  charge  that  they  practiced  usury  and 
raised  the  price  of  food  during  the  strikes.  At  first 
popular  sympathy  was  with  the  strikers,  because  it  was 
generally  recognized  that  Labor  was  not  getting  its 
fair  share  of  the  profits  of  industry ;  but  this  sentiment 
of  good-will  was  alienated  when  the  strikes  took  the 
form  of  violence  against  individuals,  destruction  of 
property  and  revolt  against  constituted  authority.  Just 
as  an  "universal  strike"  was  about  to  be  declared,  peace 
was  restored  by  the  employers  partially  recognizing  the 
unions  and  the  Government  appointing  a  Commission 
of  Enquiry.  After  making  all  allowance  for  the  inevit- 
able excitement  and  demoralization  incidental  to  nearly 
all  strikes  on  a  large  scale,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that 
the  unparalleled  outburst  of  excesses  was  owing  to  the 
bitter  "class-conscious"  feeling  engendered  within  recent 
years  by  the  absorption  of  Socialism  on  the  part  of 
Trade  Unionists;  indeed,  the  whole  affair,  in  its  exhibi- 
tion of  fierce  revolutionary  spirit  and  its  almost  fanat- 
ical manifestation  of  Labor  "solidarity."  was  more  like 
a  demonstration  of  French  ''Syndicalism"  than  of  Brit- 
ish Trade  Unionism.  Early  in  September  the  British 
Trade  Unions  held  their  annual  convention ;  the  Gov- 
ernment were  denounced  for  using  the  troops,  and  a 
resolution  was  passed  demanding  the  "nationalization" 
of  the  railroads.  It  is  significant  that  the  Irish  railroad 
men  refused  to  strike,  and  one  of  the  reasons  given  was 
that  the  movement  was  a  Socialistic  one.  Subsequently, 
on  a  trivial  issue,  there  was  a  strike  on  the  part  of  some 
of  the  Irish  railroad  men,  but  it  soon  collapsed. 

The  New  York  Sun  of  September  10,  191 1,  contained 
a  long  letter  from  its  London  correspondent  reviewing 


74  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

the  evidence  taken  before  the  Royal  Commission  of 
Enquiry.  It  appeared  that  the  men  charged  bad  faith 
on  the  part  of  the  employers  in  regard  to  the  operation 
of  the  Conciliatory  Board  of  1907,  which  they  denounced 
as  worthless ;  it  also  appeared  that  the  Trade  Union 
leaders  were  doubtful  whether  the  members  would 
accept  any  finding  of  an  Arbitration  Board  if  it  was 
adverse  to  their  demands ;  it  was  also  plain  that  the 
British  Trade  Unionists  are  now  dominated  by  an 
extreme  "class-conscious"  feeling  and  are  also  embued 
with  a  spirit  of  not  only  national  but  international  "sol- 
idarity."    The  correspondent  proceeded  to  say : 

The  new  strike  may  still  be  in  a  sense  a  labor  revolt,  the 
fight  of  the  workers  for  better  conditions,  but  its  inspiration 
is  political  and  there  seems  good  reason  to  believe  interna- 
tional. The  politics,  moreover,  are  those  of  Continental  So- 
cialism, vague,  ill-formed  and  violent.  In  an  interview  pub- 
lished to-day,  H.  M.  Hyndman,  practically  the  founder  and 
certainly  the  most  distinguished  member  of  the  Socialist 
Party  in  England,  says :  "I  have  preached  class  hatred  for 
thirty  years.  .  .  .  We  are  at  war — civil  war."  ...  As 
to  the  international  element  in  the  industrial  situation,  Tom 
Mann  (one  of  the  prominent  strike  leaders)  has  openly 
boasted  that  he  and  his  friends  are  part  of  a  great  Con- 
tinental and  American  confederation.  "Before  the  English 
strike  broke  out,"  writes  the  Berlin  correspondent  of  the 
Standard  (London),  "Herr  Jochade,  the  German  President 
of  the  Transport  Union,  was  in  possession  of  the  full  pro- 
gramme of  the  English  strikers."  ...  It  is  certain 
that  in  England  the  day  of  the  combined  strike  has  arrived. 
The   international  strike  is  only  another  step,  if  a  big  one. 

Since  the  strike,  a  movement  has  developed  all  over 
Greal  Britain  among  not  only  employers  but  conserva- 
tive citizens  of  all  classes,  irrespective  of  party,  as  well 
as    among    the    non-unionist    wage-earners    (who    com- 


LABOR'S    ATTITUDE  75 

prise  probably  three-fourtbs  of  tbe  entire  number  of 
the  workingmen  of  the  country),  for  the  repeal,  or  at 
least  an  amendment,  of  the  clauses  granting  special 
privileges  to  organized  labor  under  the  new  Trades  Dis- 
putes Act  as  to  "picketing"  and  the  exemption  of  Trade 
Union  funds  for  damages. 

American    Political-Labor    Movement. 

The  American  Labor  movement  has  had  a  phase  in 
its  development  which  has  been  absent  in  Great  Britain, 
and  that  is  in  the  existence  of  an  intermediate  charac- 
ter of  organization  between  Trade  Unionism  and  Social- 
ism. These  organizations  have  been  rather  general  in 
their  membership  (although  mostly  confined  to  manual 
workers),  as  also  in  their  objects,  they  aiming  at  eco- 
nomic changes  through  political  action,  as  well  as 
through  the  "permeation"  of  public  opinion,  as  the 
English  Fabians  say. 

It  is  a  curious  fact  that  the  Political-Labor  movement 
in  America  was  started  by  two  young  Englishmen, 
brothers — George  Henry  and  Frederick  W.  Evans,  who 
came  to  this  country  in  1820.  They  were  adherents  of 
the  Owen  movement,  and  as  soon  as  the)'  landed  in 
America  they  plunged  headlong  into  the  Labor  cam- 
paign, which  soon  assumed  an  aggressive  form.  At 
Ithaca,  N.  Y.,  George  Henry  Evans,  in  about  1822, 
started  The  Man,  the  first  labor  paper  published  in 
America;  he  next  issued  The  Workingmaris  Advocate, 
at  New  York,  in  1825-30:  and  in  1853  he  started  Young 
America.  At  the  head  of  the  latter  paper  Editor  Evans 
printed  the  first  distinctively  Labor  platform  ever  con- 
structed,— at  least  in  America — and  as  such  it  is  of 
peculiar  interest,  its  planks  being  as  follows : 


76  WHAT   IS    SOCIALISM:" 

First.  The  right  of  man  to  the  soil.  "Vote  yourself  a 
farm ;" 

Second.  Down  with  monopolies,  especially  the  United 
States  Bank; 

Third.     Freedom  of  public  lands  ; 

Fourth.     Homesteads  made  inalienable  ; 

Fifth.     Abolition  of  all  laws  for  the  collection  of  debts; 

Sixth.     A  general  bankrupt  law ; 

Seventh.  A  lien  of  the  laborer  upon  his  work  for  his 
wages ; 

Eighth.     Abolition  of  imprisonment  for  debt ; 

Ninth.     Equal  rights  for  women  with  men  in  all  respects ; 

Tenth.    Abolition  of  chattel  slavery,  and  of  wages  slavery; 

Eleventh.  Land  limitation  to  one  hundred  and  sixty  acres; 
no  person  after  the  passage  of  this  law  to  become  possessed 
of  more  than  that  amount  of  land ;  but  when  a  land  monopo- 
list died,  his  heirs  were  to  take  each  his  legal  number  of 
acres,  and  be  compelled  to  sell  the  surplus,  using  the  pro- 
ceeds as  they  pleased ; 

Twelfth.  Mails  in  the  United  States  to  run  on  the  Sab- 
bath. 

These  demands  are  said  to  have  been  endorsed  by 
over  600  papers  in  the  United  States,  and  they  were  the 
basis  of  the  Workingmen's  Party,  which  held  the  first 
Labor-political  convention  ever  held  in  the  LTnited 
States,  at  Syracuse,  N.  Y. ;  but  the  party  was  soon 
absorbed  by  the  "Locofoco"  or  anti-monopolist  move- 
ment. 

The  first  truly  national  organization  for  the  agitation 
of  specific  Labor  demands  was  the  National  Labor 
I  'nil m,  which  held  its  first  convention  at  Baltimore,  Md., 
in  [866.  It  is  said  that  this  organization  worked  on  a 
preconcerted  plan  in  alliance  with  the  Continental  "In- 
ternational:" but  it  refused  1"  adopl  a  resolution  lire- 
tilled  by  a  <  Ionian    \inerican  Socialist  of  the  Lassalle 


LABOR'S    ATTITUDE  77 

school,  in  favor  of  independent  political  action.  1 1  ill- 
quit,  the  American  Socialist  writer,  says,  with  evident 
disgust,  that  although  the  National  Labor  Union  sent  a 
delegate  to  the  International  Convention,  in  1869,  it 
never  joined  that  Communist  body,  "and  never  devel- 
oped into  a  genuine  class-conscious  workingmen's 
party."  In  1872  the  Union,  in  conjunction  with  the 
Farmers'  Alliance,  nominated  Presidential  candidates, 
thus  going  clear  over  into  the  political  field ;  but  this 
action  caused  the  collapse  of  the  organization,  thereby 
showing — what  has  a  number  of  times  since  been  con- 
firmed— the  traditional  dislike  of  American  Trade 
Unionists  to  enter  the  political  arena  as  organizations ; 
but,  as  pointed  out  a  number  of  times,  after-develop- 
ments show  that  this  attitude  has  considerably  changed 
within  recent  years. 

The  most  famous  Labor  organization  in  the  world 
was  the  Knights  of  Labor,  when  that  society  was  at 
its  zenith — say  in  1886-7.  I*1  tne  days  of  its  great 
prominence  there  was  much  discussion  as  to  whether  it 
was  a  Socialist  body,  this  suspicion  arising  largely  be- 
cause of  the  fact  that  for  some  time  it  was  a  secret 
society.  Strictly  speaking,  it  cannot  be  classed  as  being 
Socialist,  although  some  of  its  principles  are  identical 
with  "immediate  demands"  of  the  Marxian  organiza- 
tions. Indeed,  it  is  said  that  a  Christian  Socialist  named 
George  E.  McNeill,  drew  up  the  first  platform  of  the 
Knights  of  Labor;  but  he  was  also  the  "father"  of  the 
American  Federation  of  Labor,  and  all  through  its 
career  that  remarkable  organization  has  stood  aloof 
from  Socialism,  although  of  late  years  it  has  shown 
indications  of  yielding  to  the  ever-increasing  pressure. 
According  to  a  story  given  by  Hillquit  in  his  History  of 


78  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

Socialism,  the  origin  of  the  Knights  of  Labor  was  no 
less  a  Socialist  source  than  the  Communist  Manifesto 
of  Marx  and  Engels.  The  story  is  that  U.  S.  Stephens, 
one  of  the  founders  and  the  first  Grand  Master  Work- 
man of  the  order,  used  this  document  largely  in  the 
preparation  of  the  declaration  of  the  principles  of  the 
Knights.  But,  however  this  may  be,  the  preamble  to 
those  principles  declared  that  the  organization  was  not 
a  political  one. 

There  have  been  a  number  of  other  Labor-political 
organizations  which  have  had  principles  akin  to  the 
"immediate  demands"  of  out-and-out  Socialists,  such  as 
the  Greenback  Party;  but  they  only  represented  a  pass- 
ing phase  of  popular  discontent  with  existing  economic 
conditions,  and  cannot  properly  be  called  Socialist.  As 
a  matter  of  fact,  one  of  the  most  important  of  these 
movements,  "Henry  Georgeism,"  while  extremely  "rad- 
ical" on  the  one  question  of  the  taxation  of  land  values, 
is  looked  upon  by  strict  Socialists  in  America  as  sup- 
porting the  present  competitive  system  of  industry,  and 
therefore  as  being  anti-Socialist ;  and  Henry  George 
himself  was  unequivocally  opposed  to  Marxian  Social- 
ism, he  looking  upon  it  as  unsound  and  impracticable. 
But  British  Socialists  have  accepted  both  "Henry 
Georgeism"  and  land  nationalism. 

The  Federation  of  Labor  and  Socialism. 

It  is  a  significant  fact  that  nearly  all  the  great  Labor 
and  Trade  Union  leaders  in  America  have  been  in  the 
pa  t  opposed  to  philosophic  Socialism,  although,  of 
course,  they  have  been  earnest  advocates  of  social 
reform.  Among  these  may  be  mentioned  Henry  George, 
Terence  V.   Powderly,   Arthur,  John   McBridc,  and  the 


LABOR'S    ATTITUDE  79 

two  most  representative  American  Trade  Union  leaders 
now  living,  Samuel  Gompers  and  John  Mitchell. 

Samuel  Gompers,  President  of  the  American  Feder- 
ation of  Labor,  has  been  bitterly  denounced  by  Social- 
ists, and  on  the  occasion  of  his  last  visit  to  England  and 
the  Continent  (in  the  summer  of  1909),  he  was  "ex- 
posed" by  American  "comrades"  in  the  party  press  of 
those  countries ;  and  the  American  Socialist  journals 
have  sneered  at  his  pretensions  as  the  "envoy  extraor- 
dinary and  minister  plenipotentiary"  of  the  Labor  organ- 
izations of  this  country. 

John  Mitchell,  who  was  formerly  President  of  the 
United  Mine  Workers  of  America,  and  is  now  Vice- 
President  of  the  American  Federation  of  Labor,  states 
as  follows,  in  his  admirable  book,  Organized  Labor,  the 
position  of  American  trade  unionists  as  to  "wage  slav- 
ery"— the  term  applied  by  Socialists  to  the  conditions 
under  the  present  system  of  compensation  of  labor : 

Trade  unionism  is  not  based  upon  a  necessary  opposition 
to  the  so-called  "wage  slavery"  of  the  present  time.  By 
the  phrase  "wage  slavery"  is  usually  meant  a  condition  of 
practical  enslavement,  brought  about,  not  by  legal,  but  by 
economic  subjection,  a  slavery  enforced,  not  by  the  lash,  but 
by  pangs  of  hunger.  The  trade  unionist  recognizes  that  in 
certain  sections  of  the  country  and  in  certain  industries,  the 
wage-earners,  especially  women  and  children,  are  in  a  con- 
dition so  debased  and  degraded,  and  are  so  subject  to  op- 
pression and  exploitation,  that  it  practically  amounts  to 
slavery.  Where  such  slaverj  exists,  however,  trade  unionism 
is  opposed  to  the  slavery  as  such,  and  not  to  the  wages 
as  such.  Trade  unionism  is  not  irrevocably  committed  to 
the  maintenance  of  the  wage  system,  nor  is  it  irrevocably 
committed  to  its  abolition  .  .  .  and  if  it  were  ultimately 
to  be  shown  that  the  system  is  incompatible  with  a  high 
standard  of  living  and  a  full  development  of  the  capabilities 


80  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

of  the  American  workingman,  the  hosts  of  organized  labor 
would  unite   in  an   effort  to  secure  its  abolition. 

As  to  the  relations  of  the  American  Federation  of 
Labor  to  Socialism,  Mr.  Mitchell  says,  in  the  same 
book: 

Numerous  attempts  have  been  made  by  Socialist  members 
of  the  Federation  to  secure  control  of  the  body  and  to  com- 
mit it  to  the  Socialist  platform ;  but  their  efforts  have  been 
unsuccessful.  The  trade  unions  and  the  Federation  of  Labor 
itself  stand  for  a  number  of  reforms  contained  in  the  plat- 
form of  the  Socialist  party;  but  the  great  majority  of  the 
members,  whatever  their  political  sympathies,  refuse  to  per- 
mit the  Federation  to  be  committed  to  any  definite  political 
party,  existing  or  to  be  formed. 

At  the  convention  of  the  Federation  of  Labor  in  1885, 
Socialist  members  of  the  organization  for  the  first  time 
introduced  a  resolution  advocating  independent  political 
action ;  but  the  resolution  was  defeated.  It  is  said  that 
of  the  107  delegates  who  originally  formed  the  Feder- 
ation of  Labor  in  1886,  only  six  were  outspoken  Social- 
ists. Air.  Hillquil  (who.  it  is  well  to  remember  in  this 
connection,  is  an  avowed  Socialist)  says  in  his  History, 
that  Mr.  Gompers,  who  has  been  from  the  first  the 
President,  was  al  the  formation  "very  friendly  to  Social- 
ism," although  he  "in  later  years  was  its  most  decided 
opponent."  In  his  biography  in  the  Encyclopedia  of 
Social  Reform  (which  may  be  considered  semi-official), 
Air.  Gompers'  position  is  thus  defined:  "He  is  not  op- 
posed to  the  aims  of  Socialism,  though  not  committed 
to  its  views,  and  he  believes  in  political  action  on  the 
pari  of  Labor,  but  holds  that  the  main  hope  of  Labor  is 
in  the  Trade  I   nion  movement  and  that  to  commit  that 


LABOR'S    ATTITUDE  81 

movement  to  any  political  party  or  endeavor  would  be 
to  disrupt  it  and  hurt  it  irremediably." 

There  have  always  been  a  certain  number  of  delegates 
to  the  conventions  of  the  Federation  who  have  been 
Socialists.  At  the  convention  of  the  Federation  in  1890 
the  question  was  very  vigorously  discussed.  It  seems 
that  some  time  before  the  convention,  President  Gom- 
pers  had  refused  a  charter  to  the  Central  Labor  Fed- 
eration of  New  York,  on  the  ground  that  affiliated  with 
that  body  was  a  "section''  of  the  Socialist  Labor  Party ; 
and  as  the  latter  organization  was  decidedly  political, 
Mr.  Gompers'  argument  was  that  the  Central  Labor 
Federation  of  New  York  had  itself  become  affiliated 
with  politics.  This,  he  ruled,  made  the  New  York  Cen- 
tral Labor  Federation  ineligible  for  membership  in  the 
American  Federation  of  Labor,  as  the  latter  organiza- 
tion is  prohibited  by  its  constitution  from  affiliation  with 
political  parties.  In  reply,  the  Socialist  Labor  Party 
claimed  that  it  was  an  organization  devoted  to  Labor 
interests  exclusively,  and  that  its  participation  in  poli- 
tics was  only  incidental.  But  that  really  seemed  like 
quibbling.  The  vote  in  the  American  Federation  of 
Labor  on  the  question  as  to  whether  the  New  York 
body  should  be  admitted,  stood : — for,  535 ;  against, 
1699;  and  Mr.  Hillquit  thinks  that  that  vote  was  proba- 
bly a  good  test  of  the  strength  of  Socialism  in  the  Fed- 
eration at  that  time. 

At  the  convention  of  the  Federation  in  1893,  at  Chi- 
cago, a  delegate,  who  was  also  a  member  of  the  Social- 
ist Labor  Party,  introduced  a  resolution  eulogizing  the 
Trade  Unionists  of  Great  Britain  for  having  taken  inde- 
pendent political  action,  endorsing  that  action  on  the 
part  of  "our  British  comrades,"  and  submitting  to  the 


82  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

Labor  organizations  of  America  a  proposition  involv- 
ing a  similar  programme  and  basis  of  political  action, 
with  the  request  that  the  delegates  to  the  succeeding 
convention  of  the  Federation  be  instructed  to  vote  upon 
this  subject.  This  resolution  was  adopted.  There  is 
some  dispute  as  to  the  facts  of  the  sequel.  At  the  con- 
vention of  1894,  when  the  question  came  up  in  accord- 
ance with  the  preceding  action,  and  a  vote  was  about 
to  be  taken  on  one  of  the  political  planks — that  favoring 
"the  collective  ownership  by  the  people  of  all  means  of 
production  and  distribution" — a  substitute  was  offered, 
demanding  that  public  lands  should  only  be  granted  to 
actual  tillers  of  the  soil ;  and  the  substitute  was  adopted. 
At  four  successive  conventions  resolutions  in  favor  of 
Socialism  were  introduced,  but  were  not  adopted.  At 
the  last  of  these  (in  1898)  the  Federation  defined  its 
position  as  follows : 

We  hold  that  the  trade  unions  of  America,  as  comprised  in 
the  American  Federation  of  Labor,  do  not  now,  and  never 
have,  declared  against  discussion  of  economic  and  political 
questions  in  the  meetings  of  the  respective  unions.  We  are 
committed  against  the  endorsement  or  introduction  of  par- 
tisan politics,  religious  differences,  or  race  prejudice.  We 
hold  it  to  he  the  duty  of  trade  unionists  to  study  and  dis- 
cuss all  questions  that  have  anj  bearing  upon  their  industrial 
or  political  liberty. 

In  1890  the  Socialist  Labor  Tarty  officially  withdrew 
their  "sympathy  and  support"  from  the  American  Fed- 
eration of  Labor,  on  account  of  the  latter's  refusal  to 
endorse  Socialism;  and  in  [895  it  severed  all  connec- 
tion  with  the    Knights  of   Labor   for  the   same   reason. 

At  the  Convention  of  the  Federation  in  1910  a  threat- 
ened opposition  on  the  part  of  tin-  Socialists  to  the  re- 
election of   Mr.  Gompers  as   President,   failed  to  mate- 


LABI  >R'S    ATTITUDE  83 

rialize;    and    another    threatened    demonstration    failed 
in   1911. 

Socialist  Criticism  of  the  Federation. 

Morris  Hillquit  may  he  said  to  he  the  historian  and 
chief  literary  advocate  of  Marxist  Socialism  of  the 
strictest  sect  in  America.  He  was  the  representative 
of  the  American  Socialist  Party  at  the  International 
Socialist  Congress,  held  at  Stuttgart,  Germany,  August 
18,  1907,  and  he  there  made  a  report  on  "Recent 
Progress  of  the  Socialist  and  Labor  movements  in  the 
United  States."  He  noted  that  the  American  Federa- 
tion of  Labor,  "the  largest  body  of  American  working- 
men,  for  the  first  time  in  its  existence  of  a  quarter  of  a 
century,  violated  its  vow  of  political  neutrality,  when 
it  interfered  in  the  congressional  elections  of  1906." 
Mr.  Hillquit  was  sarcastically  critical  as  to  the  attitude 
of  the  Federation  of  Labor  towards  politics  generally 
and  especially  towards  Socialism.  In  his  report  to  the 
International  Socialist  Congress  he  informed  the  dele- 
gates that  instead  of  entering  organized  working-class 
politics,  the  Federation  had  sought  favors  from  State 
Legislatures  and  the  Federal  Congress  by  "lobbying 
methods."  The  fruits  of  that  activity  have,  he  claimed, 
been  very  meagre  indeed,  and  the  courts  had  slaughtered 
one  Labor  law  after  another.  Following  lack  of  action 
by  the  President  of  the  United  States  and  by  Congress 
to  the  "bill  of  grievances"  of  Labor,  presented  by  the 
Federation,  that  organization  took  part  in  the  Congres- 
sional campaign  of  1906,  opposing  those  candidates  for 
re-election  who  had  not  favored  Labor  measures  in 
Congress.  But,  says  our  Socialist  critic:  "Unfor- 
tunately the  campaign  was  conducted  by  the  officers  of 


84  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

the  Federation  on  the  lines  of  the  short-sighted,  half- 
hearted policy,  which  always  characterized  their  polit- 
ical views  and  actions.  .  .  .  And  the  result  was 
that  the  greatest  Labor  organization  with  its  two  million 
members  and  tremendous  powers  in  the  world  of 
workers,  made  a  lamentable  poor  debut  in  politics.  How- 
ever, the  mere  entry  of  the  Federation  in  politics  was 
a   fact   full  of  significance." 

Mr.  Hillquit  proceeded  in  his  report  to  the  Interna- 
tional convention  to  set  forth  the  present  attitude  of 
American  Socialism  towards  organized  Labor,  and  par- 
ticularly toward  the  Federation  of  Labor.  He  recounted 
the  past  efforts  of  the  Socialists  to  induce  the  Federa- 
tion to  take  up  separate  political  action,  and  he  men- 
tioned that  they  were  successful  to  a  certain  extent,  as 
in  i886  a  national  convention  of  the  Federation  adopted 
a  resolution  urging  its  members  "to  give  cordial  sup- 
port to  the  independent  political  movements  of  the 
working  class."    Then  he  adds  : 

These  efforts  on  the  part  of  the  Socialists  were  perfectly 
natural  at  a  time  when  the  political  organization  of  Socialism 
had  not  much  more  than  a  nominal  existence  in  the  United 
States,  and  practically  the  entire  strength  of  organized  labor 
was  represented  by  the  trade  union  movement.  But  when 
the  Socialisl  party  had  commenced  to  demonstrate  its  ability 
to  organize  the  working  class  of  the  country  politically  on  the 
clear-cut  lines  of  international  socialism,  the  wisdom  of  forc- 
ing the  creation  of  a  rival  political  party  of  labor,  of  a  pre- 
sumably  lei  tisfactoi  character,  began  to  be  seriously 
questioned.  Tin'  Socialists  in  the  American  Federation  of 
Labor  have  ao  '    ndoned  the  efforts  to  "capture" 

the  Federation  bodily,  and  have  transferred  their  energies  to 
the  task  of  educating  the  individual  trade  unionists,  in  local 
meetings  and  state  and  national  conventions,  in  the  proper 
understanding  of  the  Socialist  philosophy. 


LABOR'S    ATTITUDE  85 

Mr.  Hillquit  complains  that  "In  all  discussions  on 
Socialism  on  the  floor  of  the  Federation  conventions, 
Mr.  Samuel  Gorapers  and  other  officers  and  leaders  of 
the  organization,  invariably  took  the  somewhat  anti- 
quated position  of  'pure  and  simple'  trade  unionism  and 
occasionally  evinced  a  very  decided  hostility  towards 
the  Socialist  movement." 

So  likewise,  the  Socialists  endeavored  to  capture  the 
Knights  of  Labor.  As  a  preliminary,  they  induced  a 
number  of  Socialist  Germans  and  Jews  to  join  the 
Knights,  and  an  ''Assembly"  of  these  men  was  formed 
in  New  York  known  as  the  "Excelsior  Club;"  and  in 
1893  the  Socialist  Labor  Party  obtained  control  of  the 
New  York  "District  Assembly  of  the  Knights  of  Labor." 
The  Socialist  members  of  the  Knights  made  it  so  un- 
comfortable for  Terence  V.  Powderly,  as  Grand  Mas- 
ter Workman,  that  in  1893  he  vacated  that  office  after 
having  held  it  for  fourteen  years.  The  Knights  identi- 
fied themselves  with  politics,  and  some  of  the  planks 
of  their  platform  are  in  the  direction  of  "State  Social- 
ism," but  it  has  not  formally  identified  itself  with  So- 
cialism, and  has  resisted  successfully  the  efforts  of  the 
Socialist  Labor  Party  to  capture  it.  In  fact,  from  1895 
there  has  been  open  antagonism  between  the  Knights 
of  Labor  and  the  Socialist  Labor  Party.  When  this 
antagonism  came  to  a  head,  a  number  of  members  of 
the  Knights  of  Labor  seceded  and  formed  the  Social- 
ist Trade  and  Labor  Alliance,  as  an  "annex"  to  the 
Socialist  Labor  Party ;  and  in  form  of  organization  it 
was  an  exact  copy  of  the  Knights  of  Labor.  Although 
it  granted  charters  to  200  labor  organizations,  the  Alli- 
ance was  a  failure  from  the  very  start,  and  it  now  exists 
only  in  name. 


CHAPTER    V 

UTOPIANISM 

Whatever  is  deemed  to  be  idealistically  impracticable 
is  called  "Utopian."  To  the  Individualist,  Socialism  in 
general  is  impracticable ; — to  him,  therefore,  it  is  Uto- 
pian. But  to  the  student,  and  particularly  to  the  ad- 
herent of  Marxism,  Utopian  Socialism  has  a  special, 
definite  meaning: — the  application  of  idealistic  and  arbi- 
trary theories  of  government  to  industrial  production 
and  communal  possession  and  distribution  of  goods,  and 
also  to   social   relations,   by   voluntary  association. 

Scientific  Socialists  recognize  the  value  of  Utopian- 
ism  as  demonstrating,  up  to  a  certain  point,  the  advan- 
tages of  co-operative  effort,  but  they  deny  that  it  is 
Socialism  proper. 

Utopian  Romances. 

The  Utopians  are  of  two  kinds : — the  theorists 
purely,  and  those  who  put  their  theories  into  practice. 
The  theorists  have  generally  expressed  their  ideals  of 
the  perfect  political  and  social  community  in  the  form 
of  romances, — which  were  the  "parents  of  golden 
dreams" — and  sometimes  iii  a  philosophical  or  an  expos- 
itory form.  Utopian  communistic  schemes  have  found 
advocates  in  almost   every  age,  and  in  many  countries. 

The  most  classic  of  the  idealization  of  Utopianisrn  is 
the  Republic  <>f  the  Greek  Philosopher,  Plato,  who  was 

86 


UTOPIANISM  87 

born  more  than  400  years  before  Christ.  His  system 
was  the  most  extreme  form  of  the  subordination  of  the 
individual  to  the  State;  it  was  one  of  "extravagant 
Communism  and  smiling  Optimism,"  a  combination  of 
the  speculative  and  the  practical.  It  provided  for  the 
care  of  children  by  the  State  instead  of  by  their  parents ; 
it  established  public  education ;  prescribed  regulations 
as  to  marriage;  it  restricted  the  number  of  births;  it 
laid  down  regulations  as  to  the  occupations  of  citizens, 
these  occupations  being  controlled  by  the  State ;  and 
while  "equality  of  opportunity"  was  given  to  all — to 
women  as  to  men — citizens  were  divided  into  classes 
according  to  capacity. 

The  use  of  the  word  "Utopian,"  as  applied  to  the 
idealization  of  Communism  or  Socialism,  comes  from 
a  romance  by  Sir  Thomas  More,  the  great  Lord  Chan- 
cellor of  England  during  part  of  the  reign  of  King 
Henry  VIII.  The  romance  was  published  in  15 16.  its 
title  being  Utopia.  The  meaning  of  the  word  is  no- 
where, and  its  application  to  the  romance  is  obvious,  as 
the  book  describes  an  imaginary  island,  the  inhabitants 
of  which  held  philosophical,  religious,  and  communistic 
views  which  were  remarkable  considering  the  age  in 
which  Utopia  was  written.  In  addition  to  a  popular 
democratic  government,  Utopian  citizens  had  a  com- 
munity of  goods,  meals  in  common,  and  freedom  of 
creed ;  and  there  was  monogamy  in  the  marriage  rela- 
tion. There  was  no  money,  and  gold  and  silver  were 
considered  to  be  fit  only  for  the  baser  uses.  All  save 
the  old  and  infirm  had  to  work  six  hours  a  day.  Crimi- 
nals were  enslaved,  and  had  to  perform  the  most  labori- 
ous and  disagreeable  work.  Once  every  ten  years  the 
citizens  chose  their  houses  by  lot. 


88  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

The  New  Atlantis,  by  Lord  Bacon,  is  a  similar  work 
to  Utopia.  It  describes  an  imaginary  island,  on  which 
the  narrator  was  wrecked,  and  where  was  found  a  most 
perfect  philosophical  government,  bent  on  the  cultiva- 
tion of  the  natural  sciences. 

The  City  of  the  Sun,  by  Tomaso  Campanella,  resem- 
bles Plato's  Republic,  and  some  critics  say  that  it  is  an 
imitation  of  the  great  Athenian's  masterpiece.  Cam- 
panella (who  was  born  in  1568)  was  a  brilliant  but 
sadly  unfortunate  Italian  philosopher.  For  reasons 
which  are  not  clear  (but  probably  partly  political  and 
partly  ecclesiastical),  the  authorities  cast  him  into  a 
dungeon  at  Naples ;  he  remained  there  for  27  years,  and 
was  tortured  on  the  rack  seven  times  to  force  him  to 
confess  to  heresy,  but  without  avail.  The  City  of  the 
Sun  was  an  ideal  republic  combined  with  a  system  of 
theocratic  Communism.  As  in  Plato's  Republic,  there 
was  a  community  of  wives  as  well  as  of  goods ;  and 
there  was  also  State  control  of  population.  Campanella 
and  his  fellow-countryman,  Telesio.  arc  sometimes  des- 
ignated as  "the  predecessors  of  Bacon." 

A  much  more  modern  Utopian  romance  than  any  of 
the  above,  is  The  V  in   Icaria,  by   fitienne  Cabet, 

the  founder  of  the  Icarian  communities  in  the  United 
States.  Cabet  was  born  in  Dijon,  France,  in  1788.  He 
was  a  revolutionary  Communist,  and  being  given  the 
choice  of  two  years'  imprisonment  or  five  years  of  exile, 
he  chose  the  latter,  and  went  to  England — that  refuge 
of  so  many  political  and  ecclesiastical  exiles,  both  good 
and  bad.  After  his  return  to  France  he  published  his 
Voyage  en  [curie,  which  described  the  visit  of  a  young 
li  lnnan  to  the  far-off  country  of  Icaria.  and  the 
i     the   journal  of  his  adventures  and  discoveries. 


UTOPIANISM  89 

The  government  of  Icaria  was  that  of  a  democratic 
commonwealth,  with  co-operative  industrialism,  pro- 
gressive income  tax,  State  regulation  of  wages,  na- 
tional workshops,  agricultural  colonies,  political  free- 
dom, liberal  education,  and  equality  of  the  sexes.  Alone 
among  all  Socialists,  Utopian  or  Scientific,  Cabet  under- 
took to  settle  one  of  the  most  difficult  of  the  many 
problems  arising  from  any  proposed  system  of  Col- 
lectivism, viz.,  that  relating  to  the  publication  of  news- 
papers. Cabet  decided  that  there  should  not  be  any 
newspapers  allowed — but  only  one  official  journal! 

It  is  not  necessary  to  give  an  outline  of  the  most 
modern  and  the  most  popular  of  all  Utop/an  romances 
— Bellamy's  Looking  Backward  and  its  sequel  Equality. 
as  both  books  have  such  a  wide  current  circulation.  The 
economic  principles  so  picturesquely  presented  in  Look- 
ing Backward  were  formulated  into  an  economic  scheme 
and  party  in  the  United  States  called  "Nationalism," 
which  was,  in  a  way,  a  rival  to  Marxian  Socialism,  and 
was  much  opposed  by  the  followers  of  the  latter.  Bel- 
lamy himself  described  Nationalism  as  "industrial  self- 
government."  The  system  was  a  combination  of  Oppor- 
tunism and  Idealism;  it  was  Socialist  in  the  sense  that 
it  involved  the  nationalization  of  industry  and  the  com- 
munal ownership  of  property ;  but  the  Marxian  phil- 
osophy of  the  materialistic  conception  of  history  and  of 
the  class  struggle  had  no  place  in  it ;  consequently, 
Nationalism  is  not  considered  genuine  Scientific  Social- 
ism, but  simply  a  form  of  Utopianism.  For  a  short 
time  the  Nationalist  Party  aroused  great  interest  and 
enthusiasm,  but  ultimately  it  was  merged  into  the  Popu- 
list or  People's  Party.  But,  short-lived  as  it  was.  Na- 
tionalism had  much  to  do  with   popularizing   Sociali>m 


90  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

in  America,  as  well  as  in  England,  where  Looking  Back- 
ward had  an  enormous  number  of  readers. 

Experimental  Utopianism. 

So  far  as  common  ownership  and  common  distribu- 
tion of  goods  are  concerned,  Experimental  Utopian  So- 
cialism is  not  a  modern  idea.  Passing  over  the  com- 
munal societies  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church,  and 
those  of  the  dissenting  sects,  from  the  days  of  primi- 
tive Christianity,  there  were  a  number  of  attempts  to 
establish  Ideal  Communism  both  prior  to  and  immedi- 
ately after  the  Reformation. 

The  Anabaptists  in  Germany,  before  they  developed 
their  sexual  excesses,  tried  in  many  ways  to  put  in 
practice  a  true  Communism. 

The  "Brethren  of  the  Common  Life"  (or,  "Brethren 
of  the  Common  Lot,"  or,  "Brethren  of  the  Social  Life," 
as  they  were  differently  called),  were  founded  in  1376 
in  Holland.  They  practiced  Communism  in  goods,  and 
in    1430  there   were   130  societies. 

The  "Libertines"  were  a  sort  of  Anarchists,  in  the 
[6th  century,  who  were  opposed  to  Calvin's  dictator- 
ship. 

Early  in  the  16th  century  there  was  a  group  of  Com 
munists   in    Holland  called  "Familists"  or  "Davidists;" 
and  there  was  also  a  body  of  French   Socialists  called 
"Familists." 

(  >ne  of  the  most  interesting  and  successful  enter- 
prises  ever  undertaken  by  the  Order  of  Jesuits  was  the 
establishment  of  a  number  of  communistic  settlements, 
or  "reductions,"  .-is  they  were  called,  in  the  South  Amer- 
ican country  of  Paraguay,  in  the  early  part  of  the  17th 
century.    These  "reductions"  were  established  by  virtue 


UTOPIANISM  91 

of  a  privilege  conferred  on  the  Jesuits  by  Pope  Greg- 
ory XIII,  licensing  them  to  engage  in  commerce.     The 
settlements   were  gradually  extended  over  the  country 
watered  by  the  Parana  and  the  Uruguay,  and  continued 
to   llourish   until  the  Order  of  Jesuits   was   suppressed 
in   1767.     The  plan  of  government  of  the  "reductions" 
was    parochial,    it    being    administered    entirely    by    the 
parish  clergy.     The  native  Indians  were  collected  into 
villages,  each  village  having  its  church  and  curate,  who 
was  assisted  by  several  priests.     All  property  was  held 
in  common,  the  food  supplies  produced  by  each  settle- 
ment being  stored  in  magazines,  from  which  each  family 
were   given   enough    for   their   wants,   special    provision 
being  made  for  aged  persons,  widows  and  orphans,  and 
the    sick.     The    surplus   of   the   products    was   sold   by 
agents   at    Buenos   Ayres,   and   the   receipts   were   used 
partly  in  paying  taxes  to  the  king,  and  partly  in  buying 
ornaments   for  the  church,   and   the   remainder   in   pur- 
chasing   articles   of   necessity    which    the    settlers    could 
not  manufacture   for  themselves.     In    1732  there  were 
thirty  villages  or  parishes   under  the  care  of  the  mis- 
sionaries,   containing    a    population    of    141,000.      This 
was  probably  the  most  successful  attempt  at  Commun- 
ism since  the  days  of  classic  Athens ;  and  like  the  much- 
vaunted  Socialism  of  that  time,  the  Communism  of  the 
"reductions"     of     Paraguay     was     undemocratic :     for, 
while  classic  Athenian  Socialism  was  based  on  the  slav- 
ery  of  the   vast  majority  of  the   population,   the   Com- 
munism of  Paraguay  had  its  strength  on  the  servility  of 
the  entire   working  people    (the   indolent,   ignorant   and 
superstitious  aborigines)  toward  their  Jesuit  instructors 
and  guardians.     Well-informed  Socialists  of  the  present 
day  concede  that  the  Paraguay  experiment  is  not  to  be 


92  WHAT   IS    SOCIALISM? 

taken  as  a  demonstration  of  the  practicability  of  Col- 
lectivism among  an  intelligent  and  a  civilized  people 
under  modern  conditions ;  and  Victor  Cathrein,  who 
himself  is  a  Jesuit,  remarks  in  his  Socialism  (which  is 
the  standard  Roman  Catholic  refutation  of  Marxism)  : 
''The  reductions  of  Paraguay,  which  are  frequently  set 
up  as  models  of  communism,  were  not  strictly  com- 
munistic, and  were  destined  only  to  be  institutions  of 
a  transitory  character." 

Secular  Societies. 

Coming  down  to  the  period  covered  by  the  last  hun- 
dred years  or  so,  there  have  been  a  great  many  volun- 
tary associations,  the  main  features  of  which  have  been 
co-operative  labor  and  a  communal  division  of  products, 
either  according  to  earnings  or  according  to  needs.  A 
few  of  these  communal  associations  have  lasted  a  cen- 
tury ;  some  of  them  have  struggled  on  for  half  a  cen- 
tury, and  then  died  out ;  and  not  a  few  have  had  an 
existence  of  only  a  dozen  or  even  a  shorter  number  of 
years. 

As  a  rule,  the  sectarian  societies  have  been  the  most 
successful : — they  have  kept  together  the  longest,  have 
acquired  the  most  property,  and  have  had  the  most 
harmonious  existence.  Of  the  secular,  purely  industrial 
imunities,  most  of  them  have  been  short-lived;  they 
have  bad  a  hard  struggle  with  poverty,  and  have,  as  a 
rule,  been  conspicuous  for  dissensions. 

Comte  de  Claude  Henri  Saint-Simon  (or  simply, 
Saint -Sinn  mi.  as  generally  named)  was  one  of  the  his- 
toric founders  of  Socialism,  sharing  that  honor  with 
hi.s  fellow-countryman,  Fourier,  and  with  his  British 
contemporary,    Robert    Owen.      Saint-Simon's    theories 


UTOPIAN  ISM  93 

undoubtedly    influenced    the    growth    and    establishment 

of  socialistic  ideas  on  the  Continent  and  in  England ; 
and  probably  they  had  some  indirect  effect  in  America, 
although  bis  European  experiments  in  practical  Social- 
ism had  no  counterpart  over  here.  Still,  his  name  is 
closely  connected  with  the  United  States,  for  when  he 
was  only  17  years  of  age  he  came  to  America  and  fought 
under  Washington  against  the  British.  Later  he  vis- 
ited Mexico,  and  projected  a  plan  for  uniting  the  Atlan- 
tic and  Pacific  Oceans  by  a  canal  across  the  Isthmus 
of  Panama;  and  he  also  advocated  the  Suez  Canal.  It 
is  an  interesting  coincidence  that  the  unfortunate 
Yicomte  de  Lesseps,  who  built  the  Suez  Canal  and  com- 
menced the  Panama  Canal,  was  a  follower  of  Saint- 
Simon  in  his  Socialist  theories.  Saint-Simon  is  some- 
limes  called  "the  first  Christian  Socialist."  After  fail- 
ing to  persuade  the  Pope  to  establish  a  new  social 
economic  order,  he  started  a  system  of  social  theology 
of  his  own,  which  he  styled  the  "New  Christianity." 
Saint-Simon,  like  Fourier  and  Owen,  held  that  a  con- 
stitutional monarchy  is  not  necessarily  incompatible 
with  Socialism.  [Some  of  the  British  Opportunist  So- 
cialists of  these  times  practically  hold  the  same  views, 
although  theoretically  they  are  Republicans.]  All  of 
Fourier's  experiments  were  confined  to  France,  and 
they  collapsed  after  a  few  years,  through  divisions  over 
the  sexual  relations. 

Not  only  was  Robert  Owen  the  first  to  approximated 
see  the  relation  of  social  problems  to  the  "industrial 
revolution"  which  had  taken  place,  but  he  was  also  the 
pioneer  of  secular  Utopian  Socialism.  But,  earnest  as 
Owen  was,  and  supported  actively  as  he  was  by  able 
and   influential  men  on  both   sides  of  the   Atlantic,   all 


94  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

his    experiments    turned   out    failures.      He    established 
communities  in  Lanarkshire,  Scotland;  in  County  Clare, 
Ireland;  in   Hampshire,  England;   and  then  he  turned 
his  attention  to  America.     In    1803   George  Rapp,  the 
leader  of  a  German  religious  sect,  came  to  the  United 
States,  and  established  a  communal  society  in  Pennsyl- 
vania, and  in  1814  it  moved  to  Posey  County,  Ind.,  on 
the  Wabash  River,  where  it  founded  a  settlement  named 
New    Harmony.      Ten    years    later    Owen    bought    the 
estate  for  $150,000;  and  in  that  year   (1824)   he  came 
to  America  to   re-organize   the  society,   and  to   start   it 
on  its  career  as  the  first  example  in  secular  industrial 
Utopian    Socialism.     Owen    was    received    with    great 
enthusiasm    by    the    American    people,    his    fame    as    a 
reformer  having  preceded  him.     He  made  speeches  in 
a  number  of  the  large  cities,  and  at  Washington  the  use 
of  the  Hall  of  the  House  of  Representatives  was  granted 
him    for   an   address,   at    which    were   present    not   only 
members  of  the  Senate  and  House,  but  the  President  of 
the    United    States    and    the    President-elect,    and    the 
Judges  of  the  Supreme  Court.     Although  the  re-organ- 
ization of  the  community  at  New  Harmony  was  made 
under  the  most   favorable  auspices,  it  did  not  live  very 
long — only  eighteen  months  or  so. 

hi  addition  to  the  community  at  New  Harmony,  the 
"Owenites"  had  settlements  at  Yellow  Springs,  Ohio; 
at  Nashoba,  on  the  Wolf  River,  north  of  Memphis, 
Tcnn.;  and  at  Haverstraw,  N.  Y.,— afterwards  at  Ken- 
dal, mar  Canton,  Ohio.  The  community  in  Tennessee 
was  largely  philanthropic,  and  was  especially  for  the 
educatii  m  of  negroes. 

The  most  remarkable  theories  and  the  most  extensive 
experiments  in  connection  with  Utopian  Socialism  were 


UTOPIAN  ISM  95 

those  which  were  the  conception  of  Franqois  Charles 
Marie  Fourier,  the  third  of  the  great  trio  who  were 
really  the  originators  of  the  basic  ideas  of  Modern 
Socialism.  Under  Fourier's  system  every  worker  could 
have  a  capital  of  his  own,  and  he  could  transfer  his  serv- 
ices from  one  community  to  another.  The  characteristic 
idea  of  his  system  was  a  supposed  "harmony"  which 
existed  between  all  created  things,  and  the  requirement 
that  all  human  instincts  and  desires  should  have  free 
exercise  and  development.  To  carry  out  his  theories, 
Fourier  divided  mankind  into  "groups"  or  "phalanxes," 
each  of  these  being  the  social  unit.  The  "phalanx"  was 
to  be  grouped  around  the  "phalanstery,"-  a  double  row 
of  continuous  buildings,  of  which  the  principal  one  was 
the  "palace."  Work  was  to  be  done  on  the  co-operative 
plan;  the  minimum  of  subsistence  was  guaranteed  to 
every  member  of  the  "phalanx,"  this  being  taken  out 
of  the  common  product  of  the  labor  of  all  the  mem- 
bers; and  what  was  left  was  to  be  divided  between 
labor,  capital,  and  "talent."  Private  capital  was  ad- 
mitted, but  it  was  under  communal  control.  It  is  strange 
that  only  two  "phalanxes"  were  established  in  France, 
and  they  soon  failed.  But  Fourierism  became  quite  a 
"cult"  in  the  United  States,  and  there  was  a  wide-spread 
feeling  among  even  intellectual  men  that  at  last  a  prac- 
tical solution  of  the  industrial  and  social-economic  prob- 
lems of  the  age  had  been  discovered.  The  man  who 
introduced  the  fantastic  theories  of  Fourier  into  Amer- 
ica was  the  noted  social  reformer,  Albert  Brisbane.  Pre- 
vious to  taking  up  Fourierism,  Brisbane  had  been  a  fol- 
lower of  Saint-Simon.  As  Brisbane  presented  Fourier- 
ism to  his  fellow-countrymen,  he  modified  it  with  the 
view   of   meeting   American   conditions   and    tendencies. 


96  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

The  "phalanxes"  were  sometimes  known  in  America  as 
"associations."     Impracticable    as    Fourierism    is    now 
universally  conceded  to  be,  it  was  adopted  and  advo- 
cated by  some  of  the  most  famous  men  of  the  day  in 
America,    among-    them    being :      Horace    Greeley,    the 
famous  editor  of  the  New  York  Tribune;  Park  God- 
win, the  noted   journalist;   Charles   Dana,   the  brilliant 
editor  of   the   New   York  Sun;   Nathaniel   Hawthorne, 
America's    greatest    novelist;    Ralph    Waldo    Emerson, 
Theodore    Parker,    T.    W.    Higginson,    Henry    James, 
James   Russell   Lowell,    and  the   two   well-known   Uni- 
tarian   ministers,    George    Ripley    and    William    Henry 
Charming.      Margaret    Fuller,     the    intellectual     "tran- 
scendentalist,"  also  supported  the  movement.     With  the 
single  exception  of  the  anti-slavery  agitation,  probably 
no  propaganda  in  this  country  ever  had  enrolled  in  its 
advocacy    such    a    remarkable    galaxy    of    contemporary 
leaders   of   public   thought,   as    Fourierism   had    in   the 
height  of  its  popularity.     Of  the  numerous  "phalanxes" 
established  in  the  United  States,  the  most  famous  were 
those  known  as  "Brook  Farm,"  near  Boston,   and  the 
"North   American,"   at  Red   Bank,    Monmouth   County, 
X.  J.    "Brook  Farm"  was  established  in  1842,  and  lasted 
only    six    years;    the    "North    American"    phalanx    was 
founded  in  1843,  and  was  in  existence  for  a  dozen  years. 
<  )llicr  associations  were  organized  in  the  States  of  New 
York,  Massachusetts,  New  Jersey,    Pennsylvania,  Ohio, 
Illinois,   Indiana,  Wisconsin,  and  Michigan.     A  number 
of  State  conventions  were  held,  and  in   1S44  a  National 
convention  met;  but  Fourierism  only  lasted  a  little  over 
a   decade    in    the    United    States,   and    to-day   the   niove- 
menl  is  almost  forgotten.     Yet  John  Stuart  Mill  declared 
(Political    Economy)    that    Fourierism    was    "the    most 


UTOPIAN  ISM  97 

skillfully  combined,  and   with  the  greatest   foresight  of 
objections,  of  all  the  forms  of  socialism." 

The  Icarian  movement,  like  Fourierism,  originated  in 
France,  although  it  had  its  application  exclusively  in 
the  United  States.  The  Icarian  experiments  were 
started  to  carry  out  the  theories  of  fitienne  Cabet,  as 
set  forth  in  his  romance,  Voyage  in  Icaria.  The  inter- 
est in  his  book  grew  to  such  an  extent,  that  in  1847 
Cabet  published  a  proclamation  to  the  workingmen  of 
France  headed  "Allons  en  Icarie!" — ("Let  us  go  to 
Icaria!")  This  appeal  met  with  an  enthusiastic  re- 
sponse, and  Cabet  contracted  for  a  million  acres  of  land 
in  Texas,  and  an  advance  guard  of  Icarians  left  Havre 
in  February,  1848.  This  experiment  was  a  pathetic 
failure,  and  after  a  succession  of  disappointments  and 
harsh  experiences  and  dissensions,  Cabet  himself  was 
actually  expelled  from  the  society,  and  in  1895  the  last 
trace  of  the  Icarian  Community  disappeared.  And  yet, 
there  are  Scientific  Socialists  who  say  that  Icarianism 
was  a  nearer  approach  to  the  modern  conception  of 
the  Co-operative  Commonwealth  than  were  any  of  the 
other  attempts  of  Utopian  Communism ;  but,  as  with 
Fourierism,  the  chief  trouble  seems  to  have  been  "the 
unregenerate  residuum  in  human  nature." 

Sectarian  Communism. 

Although  the  sectarian  communities  have  been  more 
successful  than  the  purely  secular  associations,  yet  but 
few  of  them  have  become  permanent  organizations — at 
least  as  they  were  originally  founded.  Several  of  them 
have  been  reorganized  into  joint  stock  concerns, — and 
as  such,  are  "capitalistic,"  and  are,  therefore,  in  oppo- 
sition to  the  fundamental  idea  of  true  Socialism.     With 


98  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

one  exception  (the  Oneida  Community),  all  the  sec- 
tarian associations  (or,  at  any  rate,  all  those  of  any 
prominence)  are  of  alien  origin.  One  of  the  first  of 
these  religious  Communistic  bodies  to  be  founded  in  the 
United  States  was  the  "Shakers,"  which  has  had  a 
longer  successful  life,  as  a  community,  than  any  of  its 
followers.  Fundamental  principles  of  the  "Shakers" 
are :  virgin  purity,  non-resistance,  peace,  equality  in 
inheritance,  and  the  non-marriage  state,  the  married 
people  being  divorced,  and  the  single  remaining  in  that 
condition.  The  members  of  this  singular  community 
are  called  "Shakers"  because  of  their  violent  contortions 
after  the  supposed  reception  of  revelations  from  the 
spirit  world.  There  are  now  some  fifteen  communities, 
scattered  throughout  nine  States.  They  have  the  repu- 
tation of  being  very  wealthy,  they  owning  100,000  acres 
of  land;  but  for  all  that  the  "Shakers"  are  dying  out. 
The  principle  of  Communism  is  not  general,  it  applying 
only  to  members  of  the  family ;  and  some  families  are 
wealthy,  while  others  are  poor. 

The  Oneida  Community  was  founded  by  John  Hum- 
phrey Noyes,  who  was  born  in  Vermont,  in  1811.  Dur- 
ing the  great  revival  of  1831  he  became  "converted," 
and  was  ordained  a  minister  of  the  Congregational 
Church ;  but  owing  to  his  peculiar  views  on  religion  and 
on  the  relation  between  the  sexes  he  was  constrained 
to  resign  from  the  ministry;  however,  he  still  continued 
to  preach.  In  [834  he  went  to  the  residence  of  his 
parents,  at  Putney,  Vt.,  where  he  started  a  community 
of  followers  of  his  extraordinary  doctrines.  Consider- 
ing his  unorthodox  views  in  regard  to  the  sexes,  it  is 
astonishing  thai  among  the  membership  of  the  com- 
munity were  his  own   mother,   two  of  his  sisters,  and 


UTOPIAN  ISM  99 

several  others  of  his  relatives.     All  the  men  of  the  com- 
munity were  considered  to  be  the  "husbands"  of  all  the 
female  members;  and,  in  turn,  all  the  women  were  con- 
sidered to  be  the  "wives"  of  all  the  male  members — a 
combination    of    polygamy    and    polyandry.      The    men 
and  women  of  the  community  cohabited  promiscuously, 
but   any  man  or  woman   had  the   right  to   decline   any 
unwelcome  "attention."     It  was  a  system  of  the  "fre- 
est" kind  of  "free  love."     At  first  the  organization  was 
only  a  religious  association,  but  very  soon  communism 
in    goods    was    adopted ;    and    then    commonality    as    to 
women   followed   as   a  logical   application   of   the    Com- 
munistic doctrine.    The  followers  of  Noyes  called  them- 
selves  "Perfectionists."     They  undertook   to  propagate 
children   scientifically,  and   one   way  of   doing   this  was 
for   a  young   man   to   mate    with    a   woman    of    mature 
years,    and    rice   versa.      As    can   be    readily    imagined, 
these  practices  caused   intense  local  opposition ;  and   on 
this  account  Noyes  and  his  community  moved  in   1848 
to  Oneida,  Madison  County,  N.  Y.     After  a  time  sev- 
eral other  "Perfectionist"  communities  were  established, 
but  in   1857  they  were  all  aggregated  at  Oneida  and  at 
Wallingford,  Connecticut.     The  members  of  these  com- 
munities  were   considerably   above    the   average  of   like 
bodies  in  intelligence,  social  standing,  and  in  the  wealth 
which  they  contributed  to  the  common  fund  ;  and  they 
established  a  splendid  reputation   for  their  honesty  and 
for  the  excellence  of  their  farm  and  industrial  product-. 
Owing  to  the  bitter  opposition  of  the  orthodox  churches, 
the   "Perfectionists"   abandoned   their    system   of   "com- 
plex marriages"  in  1879.     This  step,  however,  led  to  the 
dissolution  of  the  community  as  such,  and   Noyes  with 
a  few  adherents   emigrated  to   Canada,   where  he  died 


ioo  WHAT   IS    SOCIALISM? 

in  1886.  In  1880  the  remnants  of  the  community  were 
incorporated  as  a  joint  stock  company,  under  the  name 
of  ''Oneida  Community,  Limited,"  and  it  is  understood 
that  the  assets  of  the  concern  amounted  to  the  value  of 
one  million  dollars.  It  is  only  fair  to  state  that  the 
members  of  Noyes'  community  denied  the  charge  of 
lustful  licentiousness,  and  they  insisted  that  every  one 
had  to  be  "perfect" — that  is,  to  be  "free  from  sin,"  and 
to  be  "holy" — before  being  allowed  to  practice  "liberty 
of  love." 

The  "Rappists"  or  "Harmonites"  had  a  sort  of  dual 
foundership,  there  having  been  two  different  associa- 
tions bearing  that  name — one  in  Lycoming  County, 
Pa.,  and  the  other  on  the  River  Wabash,  Posey  County, 
Ind.  The  first  community — which  was  in  Germany — 
was  sectarian,  the  members  being  known  as  "Separat- 
ists" (because  they  separated  from  the  orthodox 
churches),  and  its  founder  emigrated  to  America  with 
a  company  of  followers.  After  being  for  some  time  in 
Pennsylvania,  the  "Rappists"  sold  out  and  moved  to 
Indiana,  and  took  up  30,000  acres  of  land,  they  calling 
this  settlement  New  Harmony.  In  1824-5  Robert  Owen, 
the  British  reformer,  purchased  their  land,  and  with  the 
proceeds  the  "Rappists"  bought  a  property  near  Pitts- 
burg, Pa.,  to  which  they  gave  the  name  of  Economy. 
They  have  dwindled  down  to  a  few  old  men,  and  the 
property  of  the  community  is  vested  in  two  trustees; 
and,    in    fact,  the  society  is   now   a   limited  partnership, 

id  emplo]  ;  a  large  number  of  wage  earners.  Owen's 
community  had  its  separate  career — and  it  was  a  very 
short    one. 

After   the    "Rappists"    left    Germany   they    were    fol- 
lowed b\  another  company  of  the  same  sect,  who  formed 


UTOPIANISM  101 

the  "Zoar"  colony  in  the  Tuscarawas  Valley,  Ohio.  In 
April,  1819,  the  "Zoarites"  adopted  articles  of  associa- 
tion by  which  all  the  property  of  the  individual  mem- 
bers, and  their  future  earnings,  should  become  common. 
But  in  October,  1898,  the  Communistic  nature  of  the 
society  was  abolished  by  a  distribution  of  the  property 
heretofore  held  in  common,  the  experiment  being  a  self- 
confessed  failure. 

There  have  been  and  are  still  a  number  of  other  sec- 
tarian and  secular  voluntary  Communist  associations  in 
America,  but  the  above  are  the  most  important.  The 
following  communities  are  still  in  existence  after  the 
period  of  years  named  when  they  were  founded :  The 
Ephrata  Community,  178  years;  the  15  Shaker  Com- 
munities, 134  years;  the  Harmony  Community,  67 
years;  the  Oneida  Community  (now  a  joint  stock  com- 
pany), 78  years.  The  entire  movement  has  spent  its 
force,  however,  and  does  not  now  attract  any  public 
attention. 


CHAPTER    VI 
STATE    AND    MUNICIPAL    SOCIALISM 

Bismarck  and  State  Socialism. 

Socialists  universally  recognize  Bismarck  as  their 
greatest  antagonist  in  the  active  field  of  politics  and 
state-craft.  Yet  it  was  no  other  than  the  great  German 
Chancellor  who  in  a  famous  speech  made  in  the  Reich- 
stag in  1882  said : 

Many  measures  which  we  have  adopted  to  the  great  bless- 
ing of  the  country  are  Socialistic,  and  the  State  will  have 
to  accustom  itself  to  a  little  more  Socialism  yet.  .  .  . 
But  if  you  believe  that  you  can  frighten  any  one  or  call  up 
specters  with  the  word  "Socialism,"  you  take  a  standpoint 
which  I  abandoned  long  ago,  and  the  abandonment  of  which 
is  absolutely  necessary   for  our  entire  Imperial  legislation. 

Nevertheless,  Bismarck  denied  that  he  was  a  Socialist, 
as  the  term  is  generally  understood;  and  during  the 
period  of  his  power  he  used  the  machinery  of  the  State 
with  great  vigor  to  crush  Socialism.  It  was  State  So- 
cialism which  Bismarck  introduced  as  a  part  of  the  per- 
manent Imperial  policy;  and  his  avowed  object  was  to 
cause  a  cessation  of  the  growing  demand  for  Scientific, 
Revolutionary  Socialism.  Bismarck  declared  for  "the 
right  to  work" — which  is  one  «>f  the  principal  of  the 
"immediate  demands"  of  the  Socialists,  the  world  over; 

[02 


STATE   AND    MUNICIPAL    SOCIALISM    103 

but  in  so  doing-  he  claimed  that  he  was  only  standing 
on  the  old  Prussian  constitution,  which  dates  in  varying 
forms  from  1671  to  1794,  one  of  the  clauses  providing 
that  the  State  must  provide  work  for  those  of  its  citi- 
zens who  could  not  procure  subsistence  for  themselves. 
But  Bismarck  was  mistaken  in  supposing  that  the  estab- 
lishment of  State  Socialism  would  cause  a  diminution 
in  the  agitation  for  Marxian  Socialism.  No  other  coun- 
try  has  had  State  Socialism  so  extensively  and  scien- 
tifically engrafted  on  its  constitution  as  Germany  has, 
and  in  no  other  country  is  there  such  a  wide-spread  de- 
mand for  extreme  Revolutionary  Socialism. 

In  the  popular  mind  the  two  systems  are  often  con- 
founded, and  it  is  undoubtedly  sometimes  difficult  to 
draw  a  clear  distinction  as  regards  governmental  action ; 
and  in  the  opinion  of  many  Socialists  the  main  differ- 
ence is  only  that  of  intent.  But,  as  a  rule,  Marxian 
Socialists  are  opposed — theoretically,  at  least — to  State 
Socialism  as  a  permanent  system ;  in  practice,  however, 
they  accept  it  as  a  means  to  an  end — as  a  half-way  house 
to  the  final  goal, — to  complete  Collectivism ;  and,  indeed, 
State  Socialism,  to  a  greater  or  less  extent,  is  included 
in  the  "immediate  demands"  of  most  Socialist  organiza- 
tions throughout   the   world. 

German  Workmen's  Insurance  and  Old-Age  Pensions. 
Of  all  forms  of  State  Socialism  the  most  important 
in  any  country  is  that  of  the  insurance  of  the  working 
men  of  Germany.  The  German  Ambassador  at  Wash- 
ington, who  is  not  given  to  much  public  speaking,  has 
made  several  addresses  in  large  American  cities,  exposi- 
tory and  laudatory  of  the  system.  In  Harper's  Monthly, 
of  October,  1909,  Madge  C.  Jenison  speaks  of  it  as  "the 


104  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

big  fact  in  Germany."  This  writer  goes  on  to  say : 
"Six  out  of  nine  of  all  those  who  work  for  wages  are 
sure  by  law  of  an  income  and  doctor's  care  if  they  are 
ill ;  three  out  of  four  when  they  are  old  or  unable  to 
work ;  and  every  man,  woman,  and  child,  except  in  a 
few  isolated  classes  of  workers,  in  cases  of  accidents 
met  with  in  their  trades."  Old  age  pensions  now  begin 
at  70  years,  and  the  age  may  soon  be  reduced  five  years. 
The  State  insurance  is  for  accident,  sickness,  old  age. 
and  invalidism.  Indemnity  for  accidents  is  granted  irre- 
spective of  the  culpability  or  innocence  of  either  party. 
The  pensions  for  accidents  are  maintained  by  employers 
alone,  on  the  principle  that  "accidents  are  an  inherent 
feature  of  industry  and  must  be  considered  part  of 
the  cost  of  production ;"  and  the  accident  pensions  are 
paid  by  the  trade  associations  of  employers.  The  sick- 
ness and  old-age  insurance  is  borne  by  the  employer 
and  the  employed  together.  Sickness  insurance  can  be 
drawn  for  26  weeks  a  year.  Employers  pay  one-third 
of  the  premium  for  sickness,  while  each  pays  one-half 
for  old-age  and  invalid  pension  — a  much  more  com- 
mendable system  than  the  scheme  just  introduced  in 
England,  where  the  State  pays  the  entire  amount  of  the 
old-age  pension.  The  administration  in  (  lermany  is 
conducted  jointly  by  workmen  and  employers;  and  the 
contribution  by  the  government  about  pays  the  cost  of 
administration. 

State  Socialism  Defined. 

State  Socialism  can  be  defined  as  a  system  under 
which  there  is  governmental  action  instead  of  private 
action  in  tin-  ownership  and  operation  of  undertakings 
ami  the  performance  of  certain   functions  for  the  gen- 


STATE    AND    MUNICIPAL    SOCIALISM    105 

oral  good.  These  undertakings  may  cover  transporta- 
tion— the  ownership  and  operation  of  canals,  railroads, 
steamships,  street  cars,  etc. ;  and  they  may  be  of  a  com- 
merical  or  trading  nature — supplying  food,  clothing,  etc., 
or  the  providing  of  such  public  necessities  and  conve- 
niences as  are  generally  classed  as  "public  utilities" 
(telegraphs,  telephones,  water,  gas,  electricity,  etc.). 
State  Socialism  also  includes  the  performance  of  such 
functions  as  the  free  feeding  of  school  children,  the 
providing  of  free  school  books,  old-age  pensions,  life, 
sick  and  accident  insurance,  etc. ;  and  "land  nationaliza- 
tion,"— or  the  State  ownership  and  control  of  productive 
land  (that  is,  land  apart  from  parks,  thoroughfares, 
etc.) — is  classed  as  State  Socialism.  There  is  an  ever- 
increasing  application  of  State  Socialism  to  the  owner- 
ship and  control  of  local  "public  utilities,"  such  as  street 
cars,  water,  gas,  electric  lighting  and  power.  This  is 
generally  called  Municipal  Socialism,  or  Municipal 
Trading :  but  as  a  matter  of  fact  it  is  State  Socialism 
in  a  municipal  degree — State  Socialism  with  a  local  ap- 
plication. Generally  speaking,  Municipal  Socialism  is 
confined  to  "public  utilities,"  as  above,  which,  by  their 
very  nature,  are  natural  monopolies,  or  ought  to  be 
monopolies,  for  efficient  and  economical  administration, 
whether  owned   publicly   or   by   private   corporations. 

There  is  a  line  drawn  by  some  economists  in  this 
regard  between  objects  fairly  to  be  included  within 
State  Socialism  and  those  outside  its  proper  sphere : 
that  is,  it  is  held  that  the  State  should  not  undertake 
any  enterprise  which  is  "productive"  (which  brings  in 
a  revenue),  unless  it  comes  within  the  category  of  "pub- 
lic utilities,"  and  is  a  natural  monopoly ;  in  other  words, 
that    the    State   or   municipality    should    not    enter    into 


io6  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

industrial  and  commercial  undertakings  except  in  special 
cases  and  for  reasons  which  are  overwhelming; — that 
the  State  or  municipality  should  not  enter  into  commer- 
cial or  industrial  competition  with  its  citizens.  It  is 
upon  this  line  that  the  battle  is  now  being  fought  in 
England  and  on  the  Continent,  with  the  object  of  limit- 
ing the  sphere  of  operations  of  State  Socialism. 

State  Socialism  Through  Taxing  the  Rich. 

Government  intervention  in  social  politics  is  not  a 
new  thing  in  England,  and  the  doctrine  of  laisscz  fairc 
was  not  even  held  rigidly  by  Adam  Smith  and  the  "Man- 
chester school."  Until  recently  England  was  far  behind 
some  of  the  Continental  countries  in  State  Socialism, 
but  she  is  fast  catching  up.  The  British  Government 
owns  the  telegraph  system;  in  the  summer  of  1909  it 
took  over  most  of  the  Marconi  wireless  stations ;  and  it 
now  owns  the  telephone  system ;  there  is  an  active  agita- 
tion proceeding  for  the  nationalization  of  the  railroads 
and  canals ;  and  long  before  Henry  George  went  to 
England  there  were  several  schemes  advocated  for  the 
nationalization  of  land,  one  of  them  embodying  a  plan 
similar  to  George's  "single  tax"  as  a  7-ia  media.  Rae 
observes  that  "German  Socialists  direct  their  attack 
mainly  on  capital,  but  English  socialism  fastens  very 
naturally  on  property  in  land,  which  in  England  is  con- 
centrated into  unnaturally  few  hands."  Rut  things  have 
"moved"  since  Rae  wrote  that  sentence.  While  the 
British  Socialists  attack  private  ownership  in  land  just 
as  strongly  as  ever  they  did,  they  have  within  the  past 
ten  years  made  a  special  attack  on  capital  and  "un- 
earned" wealth  in  all  its  shapes— and  "unearned" 
wealth,  in  the  philosophy  of  the  present-day  Socialists, 


STATE    AND    MUNICIPAL    SOCIALISM    107 

is  all  wealth  except  the  wages  received  by  the  working 
class.  The  British  Socialists  boldly  proclaim  that  the 
rich  should  be  compelled  to  provide  for  the  necessities 
of  the  poor. 

British  Old-Age  Pension  Scheme. 

On  January  1,  1909,  the  British  old-age  pension 
scheme  came  into  operation.  There  was  a  consensus 
of  opinion  that  some  system  of  pensions  should  be  pro- 
vided, the  principal  differences  being  as  to  whether  they 
should  be  non-contributory  or  contributory  (as  in  Ger- 
many, where,  indeed,  the  employers  and  employees  pay 
the  full  amount  with  the  exception  of  the  cost  of  admin- 
istration), and  as  to  the  cost  and  provision  therefor,  if 
the  system  was  non-contributory.  The  system  adopted 
is  not  considered  a  satisfactory  solution  of  the  dreadful 
problem  of  the  indigent  aged  poor  in  the  United  King- 
dom. It  is  non-contributory,  and  there  can  be  no  reason- 
able doubt  but  that  it  will  have  a  pauperizing  effect  on  a 
large  class  of  the  population — this  effect  being  not  lim- 
ited to  the  recipients,  but  being  felt  generally,  as  it  will 
strengthen  and  encourage  the  recent  and  widely-extend- 
ing feeling  that  the  poor,  and  even  the  average  working 
class,  have  a  right  to  be  provided  for  in  their  advanc- 
ing years,  and  that  there  is  no  necessity  for  the  practice 
of  thrift,  economy,  or  self-help.  Indeed,  this  doctrine 
is  openly  proclaimed  by  Socialists.  The  present  age 
required  to  entitle  anyone  to  a  pension  is  70  years,  but 
the  Trade  Unionists  and  Socialists  are  already  demand- 
ing that  the  limit  be  65,  60  and  even  50  years.  The 
amount  of  the  pension  is  graded  down  from  five  shill- 
ings to  one  shilling  a  week,  according  to  the  private 
income  of  the   recipient.      For   instance,   if  he   has   an 


108  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

income  of  not  more  than  eight  shillings  a  week,  he  is 
entitled  to  a  pension  of  five  shillings  a  week ;  whereas, 
if  he  has  an  income  up  to  twelve  shillings  a  week,  he  is 
entitled  to  a  pension  of  only  one  shilling  a  week ;  and 
if  he  has  an  income  of  over  twelve  shillings  a  week, 
he  is  not  entitled  to  any  pension.  Voluntary  provision 
for  old  age,  through  benefit  societies,  or  Trade  Unions, 
are  not  included  in  this  disqualifying  effect  of  private 
incomes.  When  the  law  was  passed  it  was  estimated  by 
the  government  that  £6,000,000  would  be  sufficient  to 
meet  these  old-age  pensions  for  a  year;  but  it  soon 
became  evident  that  another  million  would  have  to  be 
added ;  and  the  probabilities  are  that  in  a  few  years 
the  old-age  pension  bill  will  amount  to  £10,000,000  or 
£12,000,000.  The  government  is  being  continuously 
subjected  to  pressure  from  the  Trade  Unionists  and  the 
Socialists  to  reduce  the  age  limit  and  to  increase  the 
weekly  amount  of  the  pension.  While  there  is  a  gen- 
eral acceptance  of  the  principle  of  old-age  pensions  on 
the  part  of  the  public,  yet  there  is  probably  a  majority 
sentiment  against  the  non-contributory  feature  of  the 
system,  and  there  is  a  demand  that  that  be  changed;  and 
there  is  a  movement  in  favor  of  a  contributory  scheme 
for  sick  and  accident  insurance,  similar  to  the  German 
system. 

In  the  middle  of  December,  191  r,  the  British  Parlia- 
ment passed  the  National  Insurance  Bill  providing  for 
compulsory  insurance  against  sickness  and  unemploy- 
ment of  the  working  classes.  It  is  estimated  that  a  capi- 
talization fund  of  $135,000,000  will  be  required.  It  will 
be  contributed  to  by  the  employers,  the  employees  and 
the  government.     For  the  fir.st  three  months  an  allow- 


STATE    AND    .MUNICIPAL    SOCIALISM    109 

ancc  of  $2.50  a  week  will  be  made,  and  half  of  that  for 

the  next  three  months. 


Where  the  Money  Comes  From. 

When  the  question  is  asked  where  the  money  to  pay 
for  the  old-age  pensions  and  the  sick,  unemployment 
and  accident  pensions,  is  to  come  from,  the  universal 
answer  of  the  Labor-Socialists  is  that  the  State  should 
provide  the  money,  and  that  the  State  should  get  the 
money  by  taxing  the  rich.  This  doctrine  is  being  openly 
advocated  even  to  the  point  of  confiscation  of  all  wealth 
arising  from  rent,  interest,  or  dividends.  There  are  two 
methods  of  taxing  the  rich  in  Great  Britain  which  here- 
tofore have  seemed  bottomless  in  their  capacity  for 
yielding  to  the  demands  of  the  government  for  money 
— one  the  taxation  of  incomes,  and  the  other  that  of 
making  the  estates  of  deceased  persons  pay  tribute  to 
the  State.  The  present  British  income  tax  is  normally 
one  shilling  on  the  pound,  except  that  it  is  only  nine- 
pence  on  the  whole  or  part  thereof  of  an  income  less 
than  £2,000  a  year  if  the  income  be  directly  earned  from 
a  trade  or  profession  (that  is.  not  from  dividends,  etc.). 
Incomes  not  exceeding  £160  a  year  are  exempt  from 
tax  altogether,  and  there  are  abatements  allowed  up  to 
incomes  of  £700.  The  whole  theory  of  the  British 
income  tax  system  is  to  exempt  the  poor  and  even  the 
average  workingman,  and  to  make  the  tax  compara- 
tively light  on  those  of  moderate  income,  but  to  tax 
heavily  the  wealthy.  For  the  year  1907-8  the  income 
tax  receipts  amounted  to  the  enormous  sum  of  £32,380,- 
000.  Another  fat  goose  for  the  British  government  is 
the  source  of  income  known  as  the  "death  duties."  or 


no  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

taxation  on  inheritances.  These  duties  are  "progres- 
sive," and  sometimes  they  eat  up  the  income  of  an  estate 
for  three  or  four  years ;  and  in  the  meantime  the  incom- 
ing- heir  has  to  live  in  anticipation  of  the  enjoyment  of 
his  fortune.  The  British  Government  is  remorseless  in 
collecting  both  the  income  tax  and  the  death  duties; 
and,  speaking  generally,  there  is  no  such  thing  as  evad- 
ing these  taxes.  The  British  Government  will  even 
follow  up,  say  an  American  who  has  temporarily  resided 
in  England,  entered  into  a  business  there,  received  an 
income  therefrom  but  has  spent  far  more  than  his  in- 
come in  living  expenses ;  and  then,  when  he  has  returned 
home  to  America  to  remain  permanently,  the  tax  col- 
lectors will  pursue  him  to  this  country,  with  peremptory 
demands  for  payment  of  income  tax  for  the  fraction  of 
the  year  he  had  resided  in  England  after  the  last  full 
year  for  which  he  had  paid  the  tax.  Not  only  that,  but 
an  alien,  temporarily  resident  in  England,  is  expected 
to  pay  income  tax  on  his  income  from  investments — 
even  on  interests  on  savings  deposits — in  his  own  coun- 
try; and  the  fact  that  his  English  enterprise  is  unprof- 
itable cuts  no  figure  in  the  matter.  The  same  general 
principle  of  making  him  "pay  the  piper"  who  has  the 
money  to  pay,  holds  good  with  aliens  who  die  in  Eng- 
land and  leave  their  estate  to  some  one  who  is  a  resi- 
dent in  that  country.  Notwithstanding  the  so-called 
free-trade  system  of  England,  it  is  a  very  expensive 
business  for  a  wealthy  foreigner  to  either  live  or  die  in 
thai  country.  For  the  year  1907-8  the  receipts  from  the 
"death  duties"  were  £19,070,000  (about  $95,000,000). 
Another  source  of  income  which  falls  mostly  upon  the 
property-owning  class  is  that  of  the  stamp  and  fee 
duties,— that  is,  the  requirement  that  practically  all  legal 


STATE   AND    MUNICIPAL    SOCIALISM    ill 

documents,  all  checks,  all  receipted  bills  over  two 
pounds,  etc.,  be  stamped ;  and  the  receipts  from  these 
items  amounted  to  nearly  £9,000,000  (nearly  $45,000,- 
000)  in  1907-8.  Then  there  are  other  taxes  which  fall 
almost  entirely  upon  the  well-to-do  and  the  comfortably- 
off  middle  classes: — the  house  duty  and  the  land  tax, 
which  tog-ether  in  1907-8  footed  up  the  neat  little  sum 
of  £2,690,000. 

American  State  Socialism. 

While  the  doctrines  of  Revolutionary  Socialism  are 
undoubtedly  spreading  with  enormous  rapidity  among 
the  proletariat  of  the  world,  State  Socialism  is  progress- 
ing very  fast  among  the  governments  of  the  most  pro- 
gressive nations,  Municipal  Socialism  being  included. 
In  the  United  Kingdom  the  railroads  are  still  privately 
owned,  but  there  is  a  growing  demand  for  their  nation- 
alization. While  there  seems  to  be  little  sentiment  in 
America,  outside  the  avowed  Socialists,  in  favor  of  the 
government  ownership  of  railroads,  yet  in  other  direc- 
tions there  has  unquestionably  been  a  recent  letting- 
down  of  the  bars  of  Individualism  against  State  Social- 
ism. While  bitterly  decrying  Revolutionary  Socialism, 
Mr.  Roosevelt  was,  while  President,  very  much  of  a 
State  Socialist,  of  the  Bismarckian  order, — probably 
unconsciously.  The  recent  Congressional  and  Execu- 
tive action  for  the  supervision  of  corporations,  for  the 
inspection  of  food  products,  and  particularly  the  Act 
for  the  taxation  of  corporations,  and  the  Resolution  for 
an  amendment  to  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States 
so  as  to  permit  an  income  tax,  are  all  to  be  properly 
classed  as  State  Socialism. 

The  last  national  platform  of  the   Republican   Party 


ii2  WHAT   IS    SOCIALISM? 

repudiated  Socialism,  yet  it  advocated  postal  savings 
banks — and  they  must  be  classed  among  State  Socialist 
institutions.  Replying  to  the  protest  of  the  American 
Bankers'  Association  against  postal  savings  banks,  the 
President  of  the  United  States,  Mr.  Taft,  said  in  an 
address  at  the  State  Fair,  Milwaukee,  Wis.,  September 
17,  1909: 

I  am  not  a  paternalist  and  I  am  not  a  Socialist,  and  I  am 
not  in  favor  of  having  the  government  do  anything  that 
private  citizens  can  do  as  well,  or  better.  But  there  are  con- 
ditions. 

We  have  passed  beyond  the  tide  of  what  they  call  the 
"laissez  faire  school,"  which  believed  that  the  government 
ought  to  do  nothing  but  run  the  police  force,  and  we  recog- 
nize the  necessity  for  the  interference  of  the  government 
because  it  has  great  capital  and  great  resources  behind  it, 
and  because,  sometimes,  it  can  stand  the  lack  of  an  immediate 
return  on  capital,  to  help  out.  We  did  it  in  our  Pacific  roads. 
We  have  done  it  in  a  great  many  different  ways,  and  in  this 
particular  savings  bank  business,  the  government  is  espe- 
cially fitted  to  do  what  no  system  of  private  bankers  can  do. 

This  reads  like  an  extract  from  Bismarck's  speech 
in  the  Reichstag  defending  his  scheme  of  Imperial  State 
Socialism  ! 

Some  political  economists  class  the  protective  tariff 
itself  as  a  piece  of  State-  Socialism;  however  this  may 
be,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  grants  for  the  im- 
provements of  rivers  and  harbors,  for  irrigation,  the  use 
of  national  supplies   for  relief  in  great   emergencies,  and 

the  Congn     i il   distribution   of   seed   to    fanners,   all 

come  within  the  d<  ignation  of  State  "-:  icialism,  although 
probably  but  few  Americans  think  of  them  in  that  way. 
The  propo  ed  tax  on  corporations  and  personal  incomes 
was    denounced    by    some    critics    as    being    Sociali 


STATE    AND    MUNICIPAL    SOCIALISM    113 

and  yet  the  same  people  never  think  of  so  designating 
present  activities  of  the  State  which  are  undoubtedly 
Socialistic;  the  difference  is  that  in  the  latter  case  peo- 
ple have  got  accustomed  to  the  thing-,  while  in  the  for- 
mer case  the  novelty  of  the  proposition  presents  it  in  a 
new  and  forbidding  aspect. 

Competent    authorities    differ    very    much    as    to    the 
merits  of  State  ownership  of  railroads  as  compared  with 
private   ownership.      To   an    impartial    student    and    ob- 
server there  does  not  seem  much  to  choose  between  the 
best    of    both    systems — say    between    the    railroads    of 
America   and   England  as  examples   of  private   owner- 
ship, and  those  of  Germany  as  examples  of  government 
ownership.     There  can  be   no  doubt,  however,  that   in 
all  progressive  countries  except  the  United  States,  the 
doctrine  that  the  State  should  own  and  operate  the  rail- 
roads in  the  same  way  as  it  does  the  public  highways, 
is    becoming    the    generally    accepted    one ;    but    it    is 
acknowledged  that  Canada's  experiment  with  the  Inter- 
Colonial  Railroad  has  not  been  a  brilliant  success.    State 
ownership  and   control   are   now    the   general   European 
rule.     But  no  European  country  has  gone  so  far  as  New 
Zealand    in    this    respect,    as    in   other   phases    of    State 
Socialism.      In  that  paradise  of    Paternalism,   workmen 
are   carried    free   under   certain   circumstances,    and    the 
railroads   are    used   to    further   education :    children    for 
primary  schools  are  carried  free,  and  the  older  children 
are  given  rates  which  enable  them  to  ride  120  miles  for 
from   three   to   six   cents.      In    England    some    Socialists 
are  demanding  not  only  free  rides  on  railroads,  but  free 
ocean  trips!     Presumably  they  will  all  want  to  go  first- 
class  and   to  travel  on  the   largest  and   fastest   vessels! 
State  ownership  of   railroads  received  a  set-back  by 


H4  WHAT   IS    SOCIALISM? 

the  announcement  in  November,  191 1,  that  the  pur- 
chase and  operation  of  the  Western  Railway  of  France 
by  the  Government  had  turned  out  disastrously,  after 
an  experiment  of  three  years.  The  following  remarka- 
ble statement  is  from  the  official  organ  of  the  Railway 
Workers'  National  Union: 

It  is  no  secret  to  any  one,  not  even  to  the  minister  of 
public  works,  that  the  advent  of  politics  and  politicians  to  the 
head  of  the  system  has  brought  about  the  lamentable  condi- 
tion with  which  it  now  struggles.  There  is  not  even  an  em- 
ployee but  believes,  is  convinced  that  with  the  present  re- 
gime the  system  will  be  in  a  complete  state  of  anarchy 
before  two  more  years  have  gone. 

American  labor  organizations  have  recently  com- 
menced to  demand  government  old-age  pensions.  To  a 
limited  extent  the  situation  is  being  met  by  the  volun- 
tary granting  of  pensions  by  some  of  the  large  private 
corporations,  particularly  the  railroads.  On  January 
1,  191 1,  the  United  States  Steel  Corporation  inaugu- 
rated a  system  of  classified  pensions  to  its  employees, 
ranging  from  $12  to  $100  a  month. 

Municipal  Socialism. 

If  Germany  leads  the  world  (next  to  New  Zealand) 
in  State  Socialism,  England  occupies  the  premier  place 
in  Municipal  Socialism,  or  Municipal  Trading",  as  it  is 
officially  called ;  although,  to  be  accurate,  Municipal 
Socialism  is  really  nothing  but  localized  State  Social- 
ism. It  is  the  extraordinary  development  of  this  form 
of  Slate  Socialism  which  has  lately  caused  so  much 
alarm  in  England.  Even  such  a  critic  as  Rae  concedes 
that  municipal  ownership  is  the  best  of  all  forms  of  State 


STATE   AND    MUNICIPAL    SOCIALISM    115 

Socialism,  for  the  reason  that  it  is  constantly  exposed 
to  the  watchfulness  of  the  tax-payers;  but  this  consider- 
ation is  negatived  to  a  large  extent  by  the  notorious 
fact  that  as  a  rule  it  is  those  who  pay  the  least  taxes, 
individually  and  collectively,  who  arc  the  loudest  advo- 
cates of  Municipal  Socialism. 

There  are  two  kinds  of  Municipal  Socialism — repro- 
ductive and  unproductive  enterprises.  The  former  are 
those  which  bring  in  a  revenue  (or  are  supposed  to  do 
so),  such  as  waterworks,  gasworks,  electric  lighting, 
street  railways  (tramways),  markets,  etc.  From  a  Brit- 
ish Government  report  of  1903  it  appears  that  all  the 
municipal  corporations  of  England  and  Wales,  with  the 
exception  of  18  (299  out  of  317),  were  carrying  on  one 
or  more  reproductive  undertakings.  The  local  Govern- 
ment Board  Annual  Report  for  1906-7  shows  that  in 
1902-3  there  were  1,339  municipal,  county,  and  urban 
district  authorities  engaged  in  trading  enterprises,  and 
that  the  British  municipalities  had  a  total  indebtedness 
of  nearly  £371,000,000  (over  $1,805,000,000)  ;  and  that 
in  1904-5  the  indebtedness  was  £466,500,000  (about 
$2,270,000,000) — an  increase  of  £95,500,000  (about 
$465,000,000)  in  two  years !  In  addition  to  the  "public 
utilities,"  as  generally  accepted  in  both  England  and 
America,  the  British  municipalities  have  gone  into  such 
enterprises  as  telephone  services,  golf  links,  manufac- 
ture of  paving-stones,  electric  fittings,  milk  depots, 
steamboats,  motor  busses,  bathing  machines,  fire  and 
accident  insurance,  concert  rooms,  Turkish  baths,  con- 
cert halls,  gas  stoves,  and  transportation  of  goods.  Agi- 
tation is  now  proceeding  for  the  municipalization  of 
coal,  bread,  and  the  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors ;  and 
there  is  also  a  movement  to  follow  French,  German  and 


n6  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

Belgium  Socialism  as  to  municipal  pawn-shops.  There 
was  a  semi-municipal  steamboat  service  on  the  Clyde, 
which  was  a  failure  financially ;  and  the  steamboat  serv- 
ice on  the  Thames,  put  in  operation  by  the  "Progres- 
sives" (really  Fabian  Socialists),  not  only  was  run  at  a 
working  loss  amounting  to  £130,000  (about  $584,000) 
in  three  years,  but  it  became  a  "laughing-stock,"  and  it 
was  definitely  abandoned  in  1908  after  the  anti-Social- 
ists had  swept  the  "Progressives"  out  of  office  in  one 
of  the  most  remarkable  reversions  of  political  popular- 
ity ever  seen  in  England.  In  1889-90  the  annual  local 
expenditures  of  the  British  municipalities  were  £67,000,- 
000  (over  $330,000,000)  ;  in  1904-5  they  were  £163,000,- 
000  (nearly  $800,000,000) — an  advance  of  nearly  one 
hundred  millions  sterling  per  annum  in  fifteen  years! 
The  English  municipalities  have  very  extensive  home- 
rule  powers  under  the  Act  of  1888,  and  the  London 
County  Council  have  almost  the  powers  of  a  Continental 
principality.  Still  the  Labor-Socialists  are  not  satisfied, 
but  are  clamoring  for  more  authority,  and  to  be  prac- 
tically free  from  any  supervision  or  restraining  checks 
by  a  central  authority,  particularly  as  to  the  expenditure 
of  money.  This  movement  is  being  backed  by  all  the 
subtle  "permeation"  tactics  of  the  Fabians,  who  were 
from  the  first  quick  to  realize  that  the  road  to  Socialist 
national  control  was  by  and  through  the  municipalities. 

A  Costly  Experiment. 

When  criticism  is  made  of  the  tremendous  expense 
of  the  present  rage  for  municipalization  of  almost  every- 
thing, the  British  Socialists  exclaim  with  fine  contempt 
" the  expense!"'  And  they  point  to  the  "repro- 
ductive"   enterprises    as    offsetting   the    indebtedness    to 


STATE    AND    MUNICIPAL    SOCIALISM    117 

some  extent.  A  close  examination  of  the  reports  show, 
however,  that  only  a  very  small  amount  is  set  aside  for 
depreciation.  For  instance,  the  Government  Return  of 
1903  shows  that  only  £193,274  (a  little  over  $940,000) 
is  annually  set  aside  for  depreciation  on  over  £121,000,- 
000  (nearly  $590,000,000),  which  is  equal  to  only  3s. 
2d.  per  cent.;  and  of  this  vast  capital  £103,000,000  are 
in  water  works,  gas  works,  electricity  supply,  and  trams 
(street  railroads),  undertakings  which  require  a  large 
amount  to  be  set  aside  for  depreciation.  It  so  happened 
that  the  successful  "permeation"  of  the  municipalities 
with  recklessly  extravagant  Socialism  by  the  Fabians 
was  contemporaneous  with  the  period  of  the  early  devel- 
opment of  the  application  of  electricity  as  a  motive 
power  and  for  lighting  purposes.  Under  the  advancing 
threat  of  public  ownership,  the  private  tram  companies 
and  gas  companies  refrained  from  spending  money  to 
keep  their  plants  up  with  the  times ;  so  that  after  the 
municipalities  had  taken  over  these  properties  they 
started  with  brand  new  rolling-stock  and  plants;  and 
now  the  Socialists  triumphantly  point  to  the  difference 
between  the  old  and  the  new  services  as  demonstrating 
the  superiority  of  public  over  private  ownership.  Hut 
the  youthfulness  is  rapidly  being  displaced  by  mature 
age  in  municipal  enterprises;  the  rolling-stock  and 
plants  as  a  rule  have  not  been  kept  up  in  proper  repair, 
and  they  are  rapidly  depreciating.  In  the  meantime,  the 
British  municipally-owned  enterprises  are  not  "keep- 
ing up  with  the  procession,"  at  least  from  an  American 
standpoint ;  and  in  a  quarter  of  a  century — unless  there 
be  a  great  change  in  methods — the  British  municipali- 
ties will  be  owning  a  conglomeration  of  rolling-stock 
and  plant  which   would  have  been   sent  to  the  "scrap- 


n8  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

heap"'  years  before  in  America.  It  might  be  said  that 
this  is  looking  far  ahead;  just  so;  but  even  taking  the 
Eritish  tramway  enterprises  at  their  best,  when  new, 
they  do  not  compare  more  than  fairly  with  the  best  of 
American  privately-owned  street  railroad  systems.  A 
favorite  method  of  comparison  of  advocates  of  munici- 
pal ownership  is  to  compare  one  of  these  new  and  best 
of  the  British  examples  of  municipal  ownership  with 
one  of  the  worst  in  America  of  the  privately  owned — 
one  operated  under  an  old-style  "graft"  monopolistic 
charter,  without  proper  preservation  of  the  rights  of  the 
public  and  without  the  company  having  been  required 
to  pay  for  their  valuable  privilege.  But  with  all  the 
faults  of  American  legislatures  and  American  munici- 
palities, it  can  be  said  that  street  railroad  franchises 
granted  now-a-days  generally  conserve  the  public  and 
municipal  rights.  Furthermore,  it  can  with  confidence 
be  asserted  that  there  are  privately-owned  street  car 
systems  in  America,  operating  under  these  carefully 
framed  and  honest  franchises,  which  give  far  better  and 
cheaper  services  than  any  of  the  best  of  the  municipally- 
owned  tram-way  systems  of  Great  Britain  do,  not 
excepting  the  much-vaunted  systems  of  Liverpool  and 
Glasgow.  In  an  American  city  one  can  travel  twice  as 
far  for  five  cents,  or  even  on  the  basis  of  seven  tickets 
for  twenty-five  cents,  as  can  be  travelled  in  a  British 
municipally-owned  tram  for  three  pence  (six  cents) ; 
for  the  British  system  due-;  not  include  "transfers;"  and 
then,  even  on  the  "straight"  fares  it  costs  more  to  ride 
say  three  miles  in  England  than  it  does  the  same  dis- 
tance in  America.  The  only  advantage  the  British  sys- 
tem has  is  in  short  distances.  Bui  the  American  sys- 
t(  in  ha    the  overwhelming  advantage  in  that  it  relieves 


STATE   AND    MUNICIPAL    SOCIALISM    119 

the  congestion  in  the  residence  districts,  and  enables — 
and  indeed  induces — workingmen  to  live  in  the  better 
air  and  surrounding's  of  the  country.  This  brings  up 
another  disadvantage  of  the  British  municipal  system, 
as  compared  with  the  American  privately-owned  sys- 
tem— and  that  is  as  to  "inter-urban"  electric  roads.  In 
England  the  municipal  cars  stop,  as  a  rule,  at  the  muni- 
cipal boundary,  and  it  is  a  matter  of  much  red-tape  and 
of  complicated  arrangements  for  the  tram  system  to  be 
extended  beyond  the  confines  of  the  municipality;  and 
when  this  is  done,  the  expense  to  the  passenger  is  at 
least  twice  as  much  as  it  is  in  America.  In  Great  Brit- 
ain, it  must  be  said,  the  management  is  honest,  and 
fairly  efficient,  but  that  is  characteristic  of  British  mu- 
nicipal life,  not  only  in  "trading"  matters,  but  generally 
speaking.  And,  it  is  satisfactory  to  observe,  conditions 
in  this  respect  are  improving  in  America. 

The  government  of  the  Czar  is  not  often  associated 
with  Socialism  except  as  an  autocracy  always  in  battle 
array  against  the  hosts  of  Democracy.  But  it  seems 
that  under  a  peculiar  system  in  that  unfortunate  coun- 
try, there  is  an  extensive  Municipal  Socialism  prevailing 
(although  not  known  by  that  name  officially),  as  there 
is  Socialism  in  land  ownership.  A  writer  in  the  Fort- 
nightly Review   (London),  January,   1903,   says: 

.  .  .  In  Russia  everything,  from  the  bakery  to  the  pub- 
lishing  trade,  has  been  municipalized.  The  State  is  content 
with  carrying  on  the  transport  of  the  Empire,  working  mines, 

mismanaging  steel  works,  and  selling  vodka,  but  the  local 
government^  admit  no  limit  to  their  enterprise  at  all.  The 
"Duma"  and  the  "Zemstvo"  sell  agricultural  machinery,  --red. 
horses,  cattle,  sewing  machines,  text-hooks,  medicines,  and 
magic  lanterns;  they  manage  theatres,  deliver  lectures,  trans- 
late Milton  and  Moliere,  and  expurgate  Dostoyeffsky  for  the 


120  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

benefit  of  the  masses.  While  the  City  of  London  is  won- 
dering whether  it  will  ever  own  its  tramways,  the  City  of 
Tiflis  competes  with  the  retail  butchers,  and  sells  sewing 
machines  on  the  instalment  system  to  impecunious  semp- 
stresses. 

An  American  Consular  report  says  that  the  govern- 
ment of  St.  Petersburg-  has  started  a  municipal  pharm- 
acy, owing  to  the  high  price  of  medicines.  The  various 
disinfection  and  sanitary  departments  will  be  supplied, 
and  to  private  persons  drugs  will  be  sold  at  20%  dis- 
count against  the  normal  charges. 


CHAPTER    VII 

CHRISTIAN    SOCIALISM 

Christian  Socialism  is,  in  a  special  sense,  the  interpre- 
tation of  Collectivism  according  to  Christian  principles; 
and,  in  a  general  sense  is  the  application  of  Christian- 
ity to  the  entire  range  of  Sociology.  Tt  would  seem  as 
though  the  term  is  a  misnomer  if  strict  Marxism  be 
taken  as  the  standard  of  Socialism ;  nevertheless,  there 
are  those  who  insist  that  true  philosophic  Scientific 
Socialism  is  compatible  with  Christian  ethics,  they  plead- 
ing that  the  extreme  views  of  Marx,  Engels,  Bebel,  Bax, 
and  others,  are  not  necessarily  a  part  of  Modern  Social- 
ism. But  it  is  incontrovertible  that  the  majority  of  the 
recognized  leaders  of  the  Collectivist  movement  the 
world  over  decline  to  recognize  so-called  Christian  So- 
cialism except  as  an  expression  of  discontent  with  exist- 
ing economic  and  social  conditions. 

The  Churches  and  Christian  Socialism, 

The  Christian  churches  as  organizations  (with  one 
notable  exception — the  Roman  Catholic)  have  main- 
tained a  neutral  attitude  with  regard  to  Scientific  Social- 
ism, although  sometimes  church  conferences  have  given 
utterance  to  sentiments  tinged  with  Socialism,  and  indi- 
vidual members  of  churches  belong  to  Socialist  organi- 
zations, both   secular  and  religious,  without  denomina- 

121 


122  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

tional  interference.  What  is  sometimes  spoken  of  as 
Catholic  Christian  Socialism  is  not  the  Modern  Scientific 
Socialism ;  and  the  same  may  be  said  of  several  Protest- 
ant organizations. 

Modern  Christian  Socialism  as  generally  understood 
— that  is,  that  which  involves  an  acceptance  of  the  prin- 
ciple of  Collectivism — is  a  Protestant  movement,  not 
doctrinally,  but  in  the  sense  that  its  activities,  in  an 
organized  form,  are  practically  confined  to  the  Protest- 
ant denominations — especially  in  America  and  England. 
It  is  a  singular  fact,  however,  that  Christian  Socialism 
has  had  its  greatest  development  in  that  communion 
which  has  been,  in  the  minds  of  its  critics,  historically 
associated  with  caste  and  privilege — the  Established 
Church  of  England.  Likewise,  in  the  United  States, 
organized  Christian  Socialism  has  been  mostly  in  that 
body  which  is  the  daughter  of  the  Church  of  England, 
and  still  holds  communion  with  her — the  Protestant 
Episcopal  Church,  notwithstanding  that  this  denomina- 
tion is  often  slightingly  referred  to  as  the  church  of  the 
wealthier  classes.  Another  peculiar  fact  is  that  while 
the  Roman  Catholic  hierarchy  is  as  a  rule  absolutely 
opposed  to  Scientific  Socialism,  and  while  its  special 
doctrines  have  been  condemned  by  the  Papacy  (at  least 
by  implication),  yet  the  school  of  theology  in  the  Angli- 
can Church  which  approximates  the  most  closely  to  the 
Roman  Catholic  Church,  is  the  one  which  is  distin- 
guished by  the  number  of  its  priests  who  arc  avowed 
Socialists — the  Ritualist  or  "High  Church"  party.  For 
a  period,  Christian  Socialism,  as  an  organized  force, 
was  practically  limited  in  England  to  members  of  the 
Anglican  Church;  bul  in  recent  years  it  has  passed  over 
that   limitation;   and   now   some  of  the  most   prominent 


CHRISTIAN    SOCIALISM  123 

"Nonconformists"  in  England,  and  some  of  the  leading 
lights  in  the  "Evangelical"  churches  in  America  (hoth 
lay  and  clerical),  are  avowed  Socialists,  although  prob- 
ably most  of  them  have  certain  reservations. 

The  Movement  in  England. 

The  rise  of  modern  Christian  Socialism  may  be  said 
to  date  from  the  "Chartist"  days  of  1848— "that  awful 
year,"  as  Maurice  once  called  it.  The  "Chartists"  were 
those  who  demanded  electoral  reform  as  to  the  British 
Parliament.  A  monster  petition  was  drawn  up,  said 
to  have  been  signed  by  5,000,000  persons  [this  was  an 
exaggeration],  which  was  to  be  presented  to  Parliament. 
The  authorities  feared  trouble,  and  troops  were  placed 
under  orders,  they  being  commanded  by  the  Duke  of 
Wellington.  Charles  Kingsley,  the  famous  author  and 
preacher,  was  in  sympathy  with  the  movement,  but  he 
was  extremely  anxious  to  prevent  bloodshed.  So  he 
wrote  a  placard  addressed  to  the  "Workmen  of  Eng- 
land," which  was  an  eloquent  and  noble  appeal  to  the 
good  sense  of  the  proletariat  not  to  confound  "liberty" 
with  "license."  Maurice  and  Kingsley  were  the 
founders  of  the  modern  Christian  Socialist  movement — 
at  least  in  England  and  America. 

The  English  Christian  Socialists  interested  themselves 
in  Co-operation,  but  their  plan  went  further  than  did 
that  of  the  "Rochdale  Pioneers."  The  association  of 
the  Christian  Socialists  was  composed  of  producers,  of 
workmen  who  became  their  own  employers,  who  dis- 
tributed profits  in  proportion  to  the  labor  of  each  mem- 
ber of  the  society.  In  1850  the  first  Christian  Social- 
ist Co-operative  Society  was  formed.  At  a  meeting  of 
journeymen  tailors  it  was  resolved  that  "individual  self- 


124  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

ishness,  as  embodied  in  the  competitive  system,  lies  at 
the  root  of  the  evils  under  which  English  industry  now 
suffers ;  that  the  remedy  for  the  evils  of  competition  lies 
in  the  brotherly  and  Christian  principle  of  Co-operation 
— that  is,  of  joint  work,  with  shared  or  common  profits; 
and  that  this  principle  might  be  widely  and  readily 
applied  in  the  formation  of  Tailors'  Working  Associa- 
tions." Afterwards  there  was  formed  the  "Society  for 
Promoting  Workingmen's  Associations,"  and  in  all, 
twelve  of  these  industrial  associations  were  formed. 
The  movement  was,  however,  a  failure.  There  was  a 
lack  of  "directive  ability" — and  then,  there  was  a  neg- 
lect to  recognize  modern  conditions  of  Industrialism. 
This  criticism  of  the  experiment  has  been  confirmed  by 
subsequent  experience,  viz.,  that  except  in  certain 
specialties  of  craftsmanship,  Co-operation  is  of  very 
doubtful  success  in  industrial  production,  although  there 
are  many  examples  (particularly  in  England)  of  suc- 
cessful   co-operative    associations    for   distribution. 

The  most  noted  institution  which  has  sprung  from 
<  hristian  Socialism  is  the  Workingmen's  College,  of 
London,  which  originated  from  the  Bible  Class  of  Mau- 
rice and  Kingsley.  The  Workingmen's  College  was 
opened  in  1854,  with  Maurice  as  President,  and  it  is 
still  in  existence,  but  it  has  not  run  altogether  smoothly. 
Among  the  famous  past  teachers  have  been:  Prof.  J. 
R.  Seeley,  Frederic  Harrison  (the  well-known  Positiv- 
ist),  Dante  Gabriel  Rossetti,  Ruskin,  Huxley,  and  Tyn- 
dal.  When  Maurice  died  in  [870  he  was  succeeded  as 
President  by  Thomas  Hughes,  the  author  of  the  immor- 
tal Tom  Brown's  School-days.  In  [870  "Tom"  Hughes 
visited  the  United  States,  and  the  "New  Rugby"  in 
Tennes  ee  was  formed,  bul   ii  was  not  successful. 


CHRISTIAN    SOCIALISM  125 

After  the  failure,  in  1854,  of  the  Christian  Socialist 
co-operative  experiments,  the  movement  flowed  in  two 
separate  streams  for  a  time ;  one  branch  was  identified 
with  the  Labor  agitation,  and  the  other  was  associated 
with  theology.  But  afterwards  these  two  currents 
joined  in  a  new — and  the  latest — development  of  Chris- 
tian Socialism  in  England,  the  Christian  Social  Union, 
which  was  formed  in  1889,  ufor  the  study  and  advocacy 
of  Christian  social  principles."  There  are  branches  in 
ah  the  large  cities  of  England.  The  principles  are  of 
such  a  broad  nature  that  almost  any  Christian  who 
believes  that  the  present  social  system  needs  reforma- 
tion, and  that  the  application  of  Christian  ethics  is  nec- 
essary for  its  reformation,  is  eligible  for  membership. 
It  has  affiliated  societies  in  the  United  States,  Australia 
and  New  Zealand.  The  Union  is  very  influential  in  the 
Anglican  communion. 

In  England  there  are  a  number  of  individual  religious 
societies  of  differing  degrees  of  Socialism,  one  of  the 
most  prominent  being  known  as  the  Guild  of  St.  Mat- 
thew, the  special  aim  of  which  is  to  win  back  the  work- 
ingmen  to  the  churches.  The  Guild  of  St.  Matthew  has 
made  some  very  radical  pronouncements,  and  probably 
a  large  part  of  its  membership  are  evolutionary  Social- 
ists in  an  economic  sense,  except  that  they  believe  in  the 
interposition  of  Divine  Providence  in  human  affairs, 
which  is  practically  denied  by  the  genuine  Marxists,  or 
materialistic  Scientific  Socialists.  Even  in  the  days  of 
Maurice  and  Kingsley  it  was  very  difficult  to  define 
Christian  Socialism  as  compared  with  the  purely  secular 
Socialism  of  the  orthodox  followers  of  Marx  and 
Engels,  and  that  difficulty  has  increased. 


126  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

The  Christian  Socialist    (Chicago),  of  September   I, 
1908,  said: 

As  a  proof  of  how  extensive  and  firmly  Socialism  is  taking 
hold  of  the  Church  and  becoming  the  hope  of  God's  king- 
dom on  earth,  we  cite  the  fact  that  among  the  many  Social- 
ist preachers  of  London  are  included  the  very  chief  preachers 
of  the  four  principal  denominations — Henry  Scott  Holland  of 
the  Church  of  England,  canon  of  the  world-famous  St.  Paul's 
Cathedral  and  editor  of  the  Commonwealth;  Rev.  J.  E. 
Rattenbury  of  the  Wesleyan  Church,  pastor  of  the  celebrated 
West  London  Mission,  probably  the  greatest  Methodist 
Church  in  London,  where  the  noted  Hugh  Price  Hughes 
preached  for  many  years ;  Rev.  R.  J.  Campbell,  Congrega- 
tionalism editor  of  the  Christian  Commonwealth,  the  most 
prominent  non-conformist  preacher  in  England,  who  has 
made  the  pulpit  of  Joseph  Parker  at  City  Temple,  London, 
still  more  famous,  and  Rev.  John  Clifford,  whose  name  is 
honored  by  the  Baptists  all  over  the  world.  Than  these  four 
there  are  no  names  more  honored  in  their  respective  de- 
nominations, yet  they  are  all  outspoken  Socialists,  declaring 
Socialism  to  be  the  coming  of  the  Kingdom  of  God  on 
earth. 

.  .  .  In  England  the  Church  Socialist  League,  composed 
chiefly  of  priests  and  laymen  of  the  High  Church  section  of 
the  Church  of  England,  has  enrolled  hundreds  of  priests  and 
is  exerting  a  tremendous  influence  for  Socialism. 

.  .  .  Over  two  hundred  American  ministers  in  charge  of 
various  churches  have  signed  their  names  to  a  manifesto 
issued  by  the  Genera'  Secretary  of  the  Christian  Socialist 
Fellowship,  pledging  themselves  to  Socialism — the  industrial 
and  political  revolution  proclaimed  by  the  constructive  So- 
cialists of  all  countries— as  the  political  expression  of  the 
Kingdom  of  God  I  1  told  in  both  the  Old  and  New 
Testaments. 

In  March,  1009,  there  was  formed  at  Swansea,  Wales, 
the  Free  Church  [Nonconformist]  Socialist  League,  and 
seventy-three  ministers  immediately  joined. 


CHRISTIAN    SOCIALISM  127 

American  Christian  Socialism. 

Christian  Socialism  in  the  United  States  must  be 
considered  apart  from  sectarian  Utopian  Socialism.  It 
did  not  make  its  appearance  in  America,  as  an  organ- 
ized force,  until  some  time  after  it  had  become  estab- 
lished on  the  Continent  and  in  England.  For  a  while 
the  movement  lagged,  but  within  recent  years  it  has 
shown  extension  and  virility.  As  in  Europe,  Christian 
Socialism  is  to  a  great  extent  very  vague,  some  of  its 
professors  being  opposed  to  orthodox  constructive  Sci- 
entific Socialism  in  certain  of  its  phases.  It  may  be  said 
that  on  the  part  of  all  Christian  Socialists  in  America, 
as  in  Europe,  there  is  some  difficulty  experienced  in 
apologizing  for  and  explaining  the  starkly  atheistic  and 
grossly  materialistic  utterances  of  many  leading  repre- 
sentative Socialists,  especially  those  of  the  early  days 
on  the  Continent.  The  Chicago  Christian  Socialist,  of 
March  1,  1909,  in  some  comments  on  an  address  by  the 
Right  Reverend  P.  J.  Donahue,  the  Roman  Catholic 
Bishop  of  Wheeling,  W.  Va.,  opposing  Socialism  on 
the  ground  of  its  alleged  irreligion  and  immorality,  says 
— and  these  comments  may  be  accepted  as  a  good  sum- 
mary of  the  general  sentiments  of  Christian  Socialists : 

No  one  more  than  ourselves  deplores  the  fact  that  the 
earliest  Socialist  writers,  stung  to  fiery  resentment  hccause 
the    Catholic   and  int    churches   of   Europe   were  ar- 

rayed on  the  side  of  Mammon,  flaunted  their  atheistic  ideas 
before  the  world  and  thus  raised  the  greatest  barrier  against 
Socialism,  placed  in  our  opposers'  hands  their  deadliest 
weapon,  and  furnished  them  their  most  convenient  subter- 
fuge behind  which  to  evade  the  real  Socialist  issue — the 
economic  revolution.  Socialism  has  the  whole  world  at  its 
feet  studying  economics.  Our  economic  proposition  is  in- 
vincible.    It  is  winning  its  way  everywhere,  and  it  will  win 


128  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

in  spite  of  the  atheistic  and  free-love  follies  of  certain  So- 
cialist writers;  but  on  account  of  their  folly  we  will  have  all 
the  greater  difficulty  in  winning  our  first  national  victories. 
.  .  .  We  are  Socialists  for  economic,  not  theological  rea- 
sons. 

Socialism,  in  its  Christian  manifestation,  was  pre- 
sented to  the  American  people  as  early  as  1849,  when 
Henry  James,  Sr.,  in  a  lecture  at  Boston,  made  the 
claim  that   Socialism   was  identical   with   Christianity. 

In  1872  a  Christian  Labor  Union  was  organized. 

In  1874-5  a  paper  called  Equity,  an  exponent  of 
Christian  Socialism,  was  published  in  Boston. 

On  April  15,  1899,  there  was  founded  at  Boston  the 
Society  of  Christian  Socialists,  the  Rev.  Dr.  Bliss,  the 
editor  of  The  Encyclopedia  of  Social  Reform,  being  one 
of  the  promoters.  This  was  the  first  organization  of 
Christian  Socialists  in  America,  properly  speaking,  and 
it  disbanded  after  a  few  years. 

In  1891  there  was  established  the  Christian  Social 
Union,  on  the  basis  of  the  English  organization  of  that 
name.  It  was  an  organization  of  the  Protestant  Epis- 
copal Church,  and  at  the  head  of  the  movement  were 
Bishop  Huntington,  the  Rev.  Dr.  Holland,  Prof.  R.  T. 
Ely,  and  Dr.  Bliss,  This  organization  has  not  grown, 
although  it  still  exists ;  but  there  is  another  Episcopal 
Christian  Socialist  organization  which  has  shown  more 
vitality — the  Church  Association  for  the  Advancement 
of  the  Interests  of  Labor,  which  is  more  radical  than 
the  Social  Union,  although  its  principles  are  not  social- 
istic  economically.  It  is  a  pioneer  in  seeking  to  settle 
industrial  controversies  by  arbitration,  and  in  the  move- 
ment against  "sweating." 

The    Baptists,   in    1893,   established   the    Brotherhood 


CHRISTIAN    SOCIALISM  129 

of  the  Kingdom,  an  undenominational  society.  One  of 
the  leading  ministers  of  the  Baptist  Church  was  until 
recently  the  pastor  of  the  famous  Fifth  Avenue  Chinch, 
New  York,  the  Rev.  Mr.  Aked  (now  in  California), 
who  came  from  Liverpool,  England,  where  he  was  con- 
sidered rather  an  extreme  Socialist  for  a  minister  of 
the  Gospel.  When  Mr.  Aked  first  came  to  America 
there  was  considerable  curiosity  expressed  as  to  whether 
his  environments  as  the  minister  in  "Rockefeller's 
Church"  (as  it  is  called,  from  the  fact  that  the  multi- 
millionaire worships  there)  would  have  the  effect  of 
toning  down  his  radicalism ;  but  to  the  great  satisfaction 
(and  not  a  little  to  their  surprise)  of  the  Socialists,  the 
reverend  gentleman  is  still  "sound  and  true." 

The  American  Institute  of  Christian  Sociology  was 
organized  in  1894  by  Prof.  R.  T.  Ely  (of  the  Univer- 
sity of  Wisconsin),  Prof.  George  Davis  Herron  (at 
that  time  holding  the  chair  of  Applied  Christianity  at 
Iowa  College),  and  Prof.  John  Rogers  Commons  (of 
Wisconsin  University).  Prof.  Ely  was  President  of 
the  Institute,  Prof.  Herron  was  Principal  of  Instruction, 
and  Prof.  Commons  was  Secretary ;  and  they  were  a 
very  able  trio.  Prof.  Ely  is  one  of  the  leading  econo- 
mists and  reformers  in  America.  He  denies  being  a 
Socialist,  but  he  is  against  monopolies,  is  in  favor  of 
the  public  ownership  of  "natural  monopolies,"  and  is  a 
steadfast  friend  of  the  trade  union  movement.  Prof. 
Commons  holds  views  similar  to  those  of  Prof.  Ely. 
When  Prof.  Herron  was  appointed  to  the  chair  of 
Applied  Christianity  at  Iowa  College,  he  was  an  intense 
Christian  Socialist,  but  he  grew  more  radical,  and  in 
1900  he  resigned  his  chair  and  renounced  belief  in 
Christianity  as  a  distinctive  religion.     His  old  friends, 


130  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

and  religious  circles  generally,  were  shocked  at  his  sepa- 
ration from  his  family,  and  at  his  socialistic  wedding — 
or  "annunciation,"  as  it  was  called — to  a  young  woman. 
Since  then  he  has  resided  in  Italy,  and  his  connection 
with  the  Socialistic  Party  has  been  as  a  writer  and  lec- 
turer. 

The  National  Christian  Socialist  League  (or  Fellow- 
ship) was  established  at  Louisville,  Ky.,  in  1906,  its 
object  being  thus  stated  : 

To  permeate  churches,  denominations,  and  other  religious 
institutions  with  the  social  message  of  Jesus ;  to  show  that 
Socialism  is  the  necessary  economic  expression  of  the  Chris- 
tian life;  to  end  the  class  struggle  by  establishing  industrial 
democracy,  and  to  hasten  the  reign  of  justice  and  brother- 
hood upon  earth. 

Continental    Christian    Socialism. 

On  the  Continent  there  is  a  distinct  cleavage  between 
Christian  Socialism  and  secular  Socialism.  So-called 
Christian  Socialism  itself,  on  the  Continent,  is  divided 
into  two  camps — Roman  Catholic  and  Protestant.  The 
first  is,  necessarily,  as  an  organization,  controlled  by  the 
church  ;  and  also,  necessarily,  its  aims  are  in  harmony 
with  the  doctrines  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church,  as 
expounded  from  time  to  time  by  the  Vatican.  Protest- 
ant Christian  Socialism  is  naturally  looser  in  organiza- 
tion and  more  indefinite  and  multiform  in  its  objects. 
Speaking  generally,  both  may  be  said  to  have  similar 
aims— the  application  of  Christian  principles  to  social 
reformation.  Both,  also,  are  actuated  by  the  desire  to 
hold  within  its  folds  those  of  its  adherents  who  are 
inclined  to  Socialism.  The  Scientific  Socialists — or 
Social    Democrats,  to  use  a  general   term— are  opposed 


CHRISTIAN    SOCIALISM  131 

to  both  Roman  Catholic  and  Protestant  forms  of  Chris- 
tian Socialism,  and  they  either  ignore  them  or  actually 
oppose  them. 

In  this  respect  there  is  a  marked  difference  between 
Continental  and  British  Socialism.  In  Great  Britain 
the  lines  as  to  orthodox  Scientific  Socialism  are  not  so 
sharply  drawn  as  is  the  case  on  the  Continent.  There 
is  more  "fluidity,"  as  it  were.  In  Great  Britain  the 
word  "Socialist"  has  a  very  indefinite  meaning  com- 
pared to  what  it  has  in  Germany,  France  and  Belgium. 
In  Great  Britain  there  are  Scientific  Socialists  who  are 
professors  of  orthodox  Christianity ;  and  there  are  mem- 
bers of  Christian  Socialist  organizations  who  are  in 
full  sympathy  and  in  active  co-operation  with  the  secu- 
lar Labor-Socialist  party.  In  that  country  there  is  a 
fading  of  one  school  of  thought  into  another  until  the 
line  of  separation  becomes  almost  imperceptible.  To  a 
certain  extent  there  is  the  same  characteristic  in  Amer- 
ica ;  but  there  has  not  been  the  same  development  of 
Christian   Socialism  as  in  England. 

It  is  to  be  observed,  also,  that,  as  yet,  the  Roman 
Catholic  Church  has  not  thought  it  necessary  to  utilize 
its  tremendous  social  and  organizing  energies  in  Eng- 
land and  America  as  it  has  on  the  Continent  with 
the  special  view  of  counteracting  secular  Socialism ;  but 
within  recent  years  there  has  been  a  tendency  in  this 
direction.  So  far  as  the  popular  vague  conception  of 
Socialism  is  concerned  (which  is  not  an  accurate  one), 
there  is  no  special  antagonism  in  England  and  America 
between  it  and  the  Roman  Catholic  Church ;  but  there 
is  no  misapprehension  on  the  part  either  of  the  intel- 
lectual leaders  of  Scientific  Socialism  or  of  the  authori- 
ties  of   the   Church;   and   each    side   understands   that 


132  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

there  is  an  irreconcilable  antagonism  between  them. 
The  Roman  Catholic  Church  draws  a  sharp  line  be- 
tween Social  Reform  and  Modern  Socialism. 

The  great  figure  standing  out  in  German  Christian 
Socialism  is  Bishop  Von  Ketteler,  who  was  born  in 
1811  and  died  in  1877.  He  was  the  founder  of  so-called 
Catholic  Christian  Socialism  in  Germany.  He  has  been 
likened  to  Charles  Kingsley,  of  England,  and,  like  the 
latter,  he  strongly  advocated  industrial  Co-operation. 
"May  God  in  His  goodness,"  said  he,  "bring  all  good 
Catholics  to  adopt  this  idea  of  co-operative  associations 
of  production  upon  the  basis  of  Christianity."  It  should 
be  said  that  Catholic  authorities  strenuously  deny  that 
Bishop  Von  Ketteler  was  a  real  Socialist.  In  1868  there 
was  organized  the  Christian  Social  Workingman's  Asso- 
ciation;  and  in  1870,  the  Catholic  Journeymen's  Club 
(organized  in  1847)  joined  the  Christian  Socialist 
movement.  These  clubs  are  controlled  by  the  Church, 
and  arc  therefore  opposed  by  the  Marxist  Socialists; 
they  have  grown  very  strong,  and  have  been  the  politi- 
cal right  arm  of  the  Church  in  German)'. 

The  German  Protestant  Christian  Socialist  movement 
dates  from  [838,  a  movement  being  then  started  by  Victor 
Ainu',  who  shares  with  the  good  Bishop  Von  Ketteler 
the  honor  of  being  called  the  "father"  of  German  Chris- 
tian Socialism — only  one  was  a  Protestant  while  the 
other  was  a  Roman  Catholic.  But  the  real  Protestant 
Christian  Socialisl  movemenl  was  begun  in  1878  by 
Pastor  Todt,  whose  efforts  were  ably  backed  up  by  the 
Courl  Chaplain,  Dr.  Stocker.  This  movement  is  closely 
allied  to  Bismarckian  State  Socialism,  and  is  really  in 
defence  of  Church  and  State  principles  -something  like 
the   movemenl   of   the   "Tory   Democrats"    of   England. 


CHRISTIAN    SOCIALISM  133 

The  Social  Democrats  call  the  movement  mucker-Social- 
ismus — "sham  Socialism."  It  is  now  nothing  practically 
but  a  confederation  of  organizations  for  church  and 
philanthropic  work. 

To   he   historically   accurate,   it    should   he   said   that 
France,  and  not  England,  is  the  hirthplace  of  Christian 
Socialism.     The  first  Socialist  paper  ever  published  was 
Bouche  dc  Fer  ("The  Iron  Tongue").     It  was  a  Chris- 
tian Communist  paper,  founded  by  Claude  Fauchet,  who 
in    1790    advocated    a    radical    Christian    Communism. 
There   was   Saint-Simon,   who  endeavored   to   found   a 
new  Christianity,  in  which   Socialism  should  be  a  fea- 
ture.    Then   there    was   Abbe   de   Lamennais,    who,    in 
1830,   founded   the   journal   L'Avenir,   with   the   motto, 
"God   and   Liberty,   the    Pope   and   the   People."     This 
paper  was  condemned  by  the  Vatican,  and  Lamennais 
left  the  Church  of  Rome,  but  always  advocated  the  alli- 
ance of  religion   and  Socialism.     After  his  break  with 
the    Papacy    he    published    Lcs    Paroles    d'un    Croyant 
("The  Words  of  a  Believer"),  which  Dr.  Bliss  says  "are 
among  the  noblest  and  most  burning  Christian  Socialist 
utterances  ever  made."     Cabet,  the  founder  of  Icarian- 
ism,  held  that  Christianity  is  Communism. 

In  France,  as  in  Germany,  there  is  a  distinctive  Ro- 
man Catholic  Christian  Socialist  movement.  Soon  after 
the  Franco-German  war  the  Comte  de  Mun  and  the 
Comte  de  la  Tour-du-Pin  Chambly  founded  an  associa- 
tion for  the  purpose  of  applying  Christianity  to  indus- 
trialism. This  movement  was  bitterly  hostile  to  Protest- 
antism, holding  it  responsible  for  the  misfortunes  which 
had  overtaken  France ;  and  as  an  antidote  to  Protestant- 
ism and  economic  Individualism  it  was  intended  to 
establish  state-aided  Co-operation  under  the   patronage 


134  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church.  As  an  economic  success 
the  movement  has  not  been  conspicuous,  and  the  same 
may  be  said  of  the  attempt  to  establish  Protestant  Chris- 
tian Socialism  in  France. 

In  Belgium  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  has  many 
organizations  for  workingmen,  and,  as  in  Germany, 
they  have  been  a  tower  of  strength  to  the  church.  Prof. 
Frangois  Huet  (born  1814)  was  the  great  Belgium 
Apostle  of  Christian  Socialism.  A  follower,  Prof.  De 
Laveleye,  says  of  Huet:  "Fie  was  too  full  of  Chris- 
tianity for  the  Socialists,  and  too  full  of  Socialism  for 
the  Christians."  The  same  enthusiast  makes  this  state- 
ment :  "Every  Christian  who  understands  and  earnestly 
accepts  the  teachings  of  His  Master  is  at  heart  a  Social- 
ist; and  every  Socialist,  whatever  may  be  his  hatred 
against  all  religion,  bears  within  himself  an  unconscious 
Christianity."  The  same  sentiments  were  recently 
expressed  by  an  English  Christian  Socialist  in  an  eulogy 
on  a  noted  London  Socialist  who  is  an  avowed  atheist, 
and  who  himself  contends  that  Socialism  is  incompati- 
ble with  Christianity. 


CHAPTER   VIII 

MARXIAN    SOCIALISM 

Now-a-days,  when  the  word  "Socialism"  is  used,  that 
school  known  as  Marxian  is  meant,  unless  there  is  a 
specification  otherwise.  As  Prof.  Thorstein  Veblin  says 
(Quarterly  Journal  of  Economics)  :  "No  one  is  seri- 
ously apprehensive  of  any  other  so-called  Socialistic 
movement,  and  no  one  is  seriously  concerned  to  criticise 
or  refute  the  doctrines  set  forth  by  any  other  school 
of  'Socialists.'  " 

The  Fundamentals. 

While  there  is  much  difference  among  the  exponents 
and  critics  as  to  the  details  of  Marxian  Socialism  (called 
also  Modern,  Scientific,  and  Revolutionary),  there  is 
general  agreement  as  to  what  constitute  its  funda- 
mental bases  as  a  system,  viz.:  (i)  the  doctrine  of  the 
"economic"  or  "materialistic  conception  of  history;"  and 
(2)  the  theory  of  "surplus  value."  Engels  generously 
gives  all  the  credit  to  his  friend  Marx  for  "these  two 
great  discoveries,"  with  which,  he  claims,  "Socialism 
became  a  science."  Yet,  what  is  now  accepted  in  a 
general  way  as  Marxian  Soci  lism  has  been  considera- 
bly modified  within  recent  years:  and  there  are  impor- 
tant differences  among  even  professed  orthodox  Scien- 
tific Socialists  in  regard  to  what  were  formerly  consid- 

135 


136  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

ered  essentials.  In  fact,  there  are  now  but  few  of  the 
recognized  intellectual  leaders  who  hold  the  original 
Marxian  faith  in  its  fullness.  Even  Bebel,  the  leader  of 
the  German  Socialists  in  the  Reichstag,  has  admitted 
from  his  seat  that  his  views  have  been  both  modified 
and  developed,  and  that  his  party  is  "continually  moult- 
ing." It  is  only  the  uninformed  or  hidebound  fanatical 
Socialist  who  now  looks  upon  Marx  as  the  Pope  of 
Economics.  In  1848  Marx  and  Engels  jointly  issued 
the  Communist  Manifesto — a  call  to  the  workingmen 
of  all  nations  to  unite  under  the  red  banner  of  Social- 
ism. [In  that  day  Socialism  as  now  understood  was 
known  by  the  name  of  Communism.]  The  Communist 
Manifesto  contained  a  statement  of  the  principles  of 
Modern  Socialism  as  elaborated  afterward  by  Marx 
in  his  stupendous  work.  Das  Capital  (or  Capital,  as  now 
generally  given  in  America  and  England).  In  that  his- 
toric document  was  stated  the  "fundamental  proposi- 
tion" or  "nucleus''  of  Socialism ;  and  Engels  says  that 
this  "belongs  to  Marx."  In  an  introduction  to  the 
Manifesto  Engels  thus  presents  Marx's  "fundamental 
proposition" : 

Thai    in    every   historical    epoch,   the   prevailing   mode   of 
nomic  production  and  exchange,  and  the    ocial  organiza- 
tion necessarily  following  from  it,  form  the  basis  upon  which 
is  buill    up,   rind    from   which   alone   can   be  explained,  the 
political  and  intellectual   history  of  thai   epoch;  that  conse- 
quently the  whole  history  of  mankind   (since  the  dissolution 
nf  primitive  iril>;il    ociety,  holding  land  in  common  owner- 
.],,],)  has  been  a  history  of  class  struggles,  contests  between 
loiting     md    1     ploited,   ruling   and  oppressed   classes;  that 
the  history  of  these  class  struggles  forms  a  series  of  evolu 
tion  in  which.nov*  a-days, a  stage  has  been  reached  wherethe 
ted  and  oppressed  class— tin  proletariat— cannot  attain 


MARXIAN    SOCIALISM  137 

its  emancipation  from  the  sway  of  the  exploiting  and  ruling 
class — the  bourgeoisie — without,  at  the  same  time,  and  once 
and  for  all,  emancipating  society  at  large  from  all  exploita- 
tion,  oppression,   class   distinction   and   class   struggles. 

In  the  opinion  of  Engels,  this  proposition  was  "des- 
tined to  do  for  history  what  Darwin's  theory  has  done 
for  biology." 

Marx's  "Capital." 

This  evolutionary  theory,  as  applied  to  labor  and 
production,  is  what  Socialists  call  the  "economic"  or 
"materialistic  conception  of  history,"  and  sometimes 
"economic  determinism."  In  Capital  Marx  presents  this 
theory  most  elaborately — and,  as  his  admirers  claim,  to 
a  mathematical  demonstration ;  and,  as  a  matter  of  fact, 
much  of  Marx's  argument  is  in  mathematical  form.  It 
may  be  said  at  the  outset  that  most  of  the  recognized 
political  economists  differ  radically  from  Marx  in  his 
theory  of  Capital,  and  Labor ;  but  there  is  a  general  con- 
cession that  in  producing  his  marvellous  work  Marx 
has  earned  a  leading  place  among  economists.  Capital 
is  sometimes  styled  "the  Bible  of  Socialism;"  and  some 
enthusiasts  are  extravagant  in  their  attributes  to  Marx. 
For  instance,  Spargo  (an  English- American  ex-minis- 
ter), in  The  Spiritual  Significance  of  Modem  Socialism, 
speaks  of  "great  men,  such  world-figures  as  Jesus,  Sa- 
vanarola,  Luther,  Lincoln,  and  Marx." 

What  is  specifically  known  as  Marxian  Socialism  is 
the  system  expounded  primarily  in  the  Communist 
Manifesto  and  afterwards  elaborated  in  Capital;  but 
the  system  also  includes  expositions  by  Marx  in  miscel- 
laneous writings;  and  in  a  general  way  Marxian  So- 
cialism embraces   propositions  and  views   set   forth  by 


138  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

such  authorities  as  Engels,  Liebknecht,  Bebel,  and  Kaut- 
sky  among  the  Germans;  by  Gronlund,  Spargo,  Hill- 
quit,  and  Walling  among  American  Socialists ;  and  by 
Morris,  Bax  and  Hyndman,  among  English  Socialists. 
As  a  matter  of  fact,  however,  there  is  much  difficulty  in 
defining  exactly  what  Marxian  Socialism  really  is, 
largely  because  there  is  so  much  ambiguity  and  deep 
profundity  in  Marx's  Capital  itself.  Primarily,  this 
worlc  is  a  criticism  of  modern  Capitalism,  and  it  is  only 
indirectly  an  exposition  of  Socialism  as  a  theory  or 
system.  Admittedly,  there  is  no  other  production  in  the 
whole  range  of  economic  literature  so  difficult  for  even 
expert  and  informed  students  to  fully  comprehend  as 
Capital;  and  to  the  average  reader  much  of  it  is  as  puz- 
zling as  a  problem  in  algebra.  Furthermore,  the  entire 
work  of  Capital  has  not  been  available  to  the  vast  ma- 
jority of  even  the  most  enthusiastic  admirers  of  Marx — 
at  least,  in  America  and  England. 

Marx  died  in  1883.  Up  to  that  time  only  one  volume 
of  Capital  had  been  published  (it  being  in  German), 
and  the  first  edition  of  that  volume  to  appear  in  English 
was  in  1886,  it  being  a  translation  of  the  third  German 
edition  as  a  basis — that  edition  having  been  prepared 
the  year  Marx  died,  with  the  assistance  of  notes  left  by 
the  author.  The  first  English  edition  of  the  first  volume 
was  edited  by  Engels,  the  translation  being  by  an  old 
English  friend  of  Marx  and  Engels,  with  the  assistance 
of  .Marx's  daughter  and  her  husband,  Dr.  Aveling,  who 
im<  <>iii'  of  the  leading  Socialists  in  Europe.  Marx 
had  planned  a  translation  of  the  first  valume  in  1876  in 
America,  but  the  project  was  abandoned  chiefly  because 
of  the  lack  of  a  fit  translator.  When  Marx  died  he  left 
hi    unpublished  notes  to  Engels,  who  issued  in  German 


MARXIAN    SOCIALISM  139 

the  second  and  third  volumes;  then  he  died,  in  London, 
as  had  Marx;  and  the  two  greatest  of  all  Modern  So- 
cialists, literary  partners  and  the  warmest  of  friend-, 
lie  huried  in  that  city.  Until  quite  recently,  only  the 
first  two  volumes  have  been  available  in  English ;  but 
the  third  volume  has  recently  been  published  in  that 
language,  it  being  part  of  an  American  publication 
edited  by  a  well-known  admirer  of  Marx  and  Engels, 
Ernest  Untermann.  In  his  preface  that  gentleman  de- 
clares that  "as  a  matter  of  fact,  a  large  portion  of  the 
contents  of  Capital  is  as  much  a  creation  of  Engels  as 
though  he  had  written  it  independently  of  Marx."  But 
even  the  third  volume  does  not  exhaust  the  "raw  mate- 
rial" left  in  the  form  of  rough  notes  by  Marx  to  his  lit- 
erary executor,  Engels.  Mr.  Untermann  says  that  some 
years  previous  to  Engel's  death,  and  in  anticipation  of 
such  an  eventuality,  the  latter  had  appointed  Karl  Kaut- 
sky,  the  editor  of  Die  Neue  Zcit,  the  scientific  organ  of 
the  German  Socialist  Party,  as  his  successor,  and  famil- 
iarized him  personally  with  the  subject  matter  intended 
for  volume  IV  of  Capital.  The  material  proved  to  be  so 
voluminous,  that  Kautsky,  instead  of  making  a  fourth 
volume  of  Capital  out  of  it,  abandoned  the  original  plan 
and  issued  his  elaboration  as  a  separate  work  in  three 
volumes  under  the  title  of  Theories  of  Surplus  Value. 
It  is  announced  that  an  English  translation  of  Kaut- 
sky's  compilation  of  the  posthumous  notes  of  Marx  and 
Engels  will  appear  in  due  time.  So,  up  to  the  present 
time,  only  three  volumes  of  Capital  are  available  in  the 
English  language ;  and  there  are  three  additional  vol- 
umes of  the  same  stupendous  work,  but  under  another 
name,  which,  as  yet,  have  not  been  translated  into  Eng- 
lish. 


140  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

Prof.  LeRossignol  argues  in  Orthodox  Socialism  that 
"the  Marxian  view  of  history  should  be  called  psycho- 
logical rather  than  materialistic,  for  it  is  based  upon  a 
study  of  the  motives  which  actuate  human  conduct;" 
and  although  the  Professor  is  a  severe  critic  of  Modern 
Socialism,  he  concedes  that  Marx's  economic  interpre- 
tation of  history  "is  a  scientific  conception,  and  in  so  far 
as  it  is  a  part  of  Socialism,  Socialism  is  scientific."  On 
the  other  hand,  Dr.  Bliss,  who  is  an  avowed  but  a  mod- 
erate Socialist,  says,  in  his  Handbook  of  Socialism: 

Marxian  Socialism  has  been  technically  called  "Scientific 
Socialism,"  but  to-day  by  no  means  all  scientific  Socialists 
accept  its  analysis.  Many  of  them,  particularly  in  England, 
reject  Marxian  economics,  even  in  the  same  breath  that 
they  acknowledge  the  service  rendered  to  mankind  by  Marx, 
and  even  while  they  enthusiastically  support  the  Marxian 
Socialist  policy.  Marx  was  not  the  founder  of  a  new  eco- 
nomic system.  He  simply  took  the  economic  basis  he  in- 
herited from  Adam  Smith  and  Ricardo,  and  carried  it  out 
with  wide  learning,  masterly  analysis,  and  acutest  logic  into 
Socialism.  But  it  may  be  carried  still  further  to  Anarchism. 
If  labor  is  the  source  of  value,  Anarchism  is  logical,  though 
impracticable.  But  the  trouble  was  with  what  Marx  in- 
herited. Most  political  economists  to-day  and  a  growing 
number  of  Socialists  reject  his  inherited  fundamental  basis 
that  labor  is  the  source  and  measure  of  [exchange]  value. 
They  are  coming  to  hold  rather  with  Jevons,  that  utility, 
rightly  conceived,  is  the  source  of  [exchange]  value.  Re- 
jecting the  basis,  they  therefore  reject  the  Marxian  analysis 
and  come  to  In  from  another  standpoint.     All  modern 

production  they  declare  to  be  a  social  process,  to  which  land, 
capital  and  labor  must  all  contribute.  If  any  persons  monop- 
olize any  <>f  these  elements,  all  other  persons  are  necessarily 
.it  their  service.  Therefore  tiny  would  have  society,  as  a 
whole,  own  both  land  and  capital  and  perform  labor. 


MARXIAN    SOCIALISM  141 

The  Marxian  Theory  of  Values. 

"The  key  to  Marx's  economic  doctrines,"  declares 
Prof.  Ely,  "is  his  theory  of  value;"  and  yet,  as  can  be 
seen  from  the  above  quotation  from  Dr.  Bliss,  there  is 
not  an  acceptance  of  this  theory  by  all  Socialists.  In- 
deed, there  is  much  confusion  and  difference  among 
both  Socialist  and  anti-Socialist  authorities,  in  present- 
ing in  specific  formula  exactly  what  Marx's  theory  is — 
and  particularly  what  it  is  in  relation  to  Labor.  The 
theory  is  admitted  by  informed  admirers  of  Marx  not 
to  be  original  with  him,  but  is  conceded  to  be  an  ampli- 
fication and  scientific  systemization  of  theories  advanced 
by  Rodbertus  and  Ricardo  and  others.  Although  Prof. 
Ely  disclaims  being  a  Socialist,  yet  the  followers  of 
Marx  accept  him  as  an  impartial  expounder  of  their 
doctrines ;  and  the  following  outline  by  him  in  French 
and  German  Socialism  of  the  Marxian  theory  of  values 
may  be  taken  as  one  of  the  best  succinct  statements  of 
this  complicated  principle  of  Socialism  which  has  ever 
been  made : 

He  [Marx]  begins  by  separating  value  in  use  from  value 
in  exchange.  Value  in  use  is  utility,  arising  from  the 
adaptation  of  an  article  to  satisfy  some  human  need.  Air, 
water,  sunshine,  wheat,  potatoes,  gold,  and  diamonds  are 
examples.  It  does  not  necessarily  imply  exchange  value. 
Many  goods  are  very  useful  but  not  exchangeable,  because 
they  are  free  to  all.  Such  is  the  case,  usually,  with  water. 
On  the  other  hand,  no  goods  can  have  value  in  exchange 
unless  it  is  useful.  Men  will  not  give  something  for  that 
which  satisfies  no  want  or  need.  Both  value  in  use  and 
value  in  exchange  are  utilities,  but,  as  they  differ,  there  must 
be  some  element  in  the  one  which  the  other  duo  not  per  se 
contain.  We  find  what  that  is  by  analyzing  the  constituent 
elements  of  different  goods  which  possess  exchange  value. 
iHow  can  we  compare   them?       Only  because  they  contain 


142  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

some  common  element.  .  .  .  The  common  element  is 
found  alone  in  human  labor.  You  compare  labor  with  labor. 
.  .  .  Labor-time  is  the  measure  which  we  apply  to  differ- 
ent commodities  in  order  to  compare  them.  We  mean  there- 
by the  ordinary  average  labor  which  is  required  at  a  given 
time  in  a  given  society.  The  average  man  is  taken  as  a 
basis,  together  with  the  average  advantages  of  machinery 
and  the  arts.  This  is  average  social  labor-time.  Complicated 
labor  is  simply  a  multiple  of  simple  labor.  One  man's  labor, 
which  has  required  long  and  careful  training,  may  count  for 
twice  as  much  as  ordinary,  simple  labor ;  but  the  simple  labor 
is  the  unit. 

Spargo  (who  often  complains  that  critics  misrepre- 
sent Marx)   thus  states  the  theory   (Socialism)  : 

.  .  .  To  state  the  Marxian  theory  accurately,  we  must 
qualify  the  bald  statement  that  the  exchange  value  of  com- 
modities is  determined  by  the  amount  of  labor  embodied  in 
them,  and  state  it  in  the  following  manner:  The  exchange 
value  of  commodities  is  determined  by  the  amount  of  average 
labor  at  the  time  socially  necessary  for  their  production. 
This  is  determined,  not  absolutely  in  individual  cases,  but 
approximately  in  general,  by  the  bargaining  and  higgling  of 
the   market,  to  adopt   Adam   Smith's  well-known  phrase. 

The  best-known  Marxian  authority  in  America,  Hill- 
quit,  thus  summarizes  the  fundamental  principle  of  Mod- 
ern Socialism   (Socialism  in   Theory  and  Practice): 

The  principal   wealth  "f  modem  society   is  represented  by 
an  accumulation  of  commodities  owned  by  individual  coni- 
ng capitalists  and  used   for  the  purpose  of  exchange.     The 
process  of  modern    industry  is  ;i   process  of  manufacture  and 

exchang  uch  a  mmodities.    All  wealth  is  created  in  that 

process,  and  all  profil  an  dt  rived  through  it.  The  different 
commodities  exchange  for  each  other  at  their  actual  value; 
hence,   the  accumulation   of  profit  and  wealth  must  not  be 


MARXIAN    SOCIALISM  143 

looked  for  in  the  process  of  exchange,  but  in  the  process  of 
production. 

The  value  of  a  commodity  is  determined  by  the  average 
social  labor  expended  on  its  production,  and  if  the  manu- 
facturing capitalist  should  pay  to  the  laborer  a  wage  equiva- 
lent to  the  products  of  his  labor,  there  would  remain  no 
margin  of  profit  for  him,  and  the  hoarding  up  of  individual 
wealth    would   be   impossible. 

Dr.  Bliss  is  one  of  the  many  educated  Socialists  who 
repudiates  Marx's  theory  of  values,  as  generally  inter- 
preted by  both  his  followers  and  critics,  his  view  being : 
"Labor  does  not  measure  value.  A  bushel  of  grain 
carefully  and  laboriously  raised  on  a  desert  island 
sells  for  no  more  than  a  bushel  of  grain  raised  in  Kent 
or  Kansas.  Utility,  rightly  understood,  is  the  measure 
of  value." 

So  great  is  the  difference  among  Socialists  upon  this 
point,  and  so  effective  has  been  the  criticism  of  anti- 
Socialists  upon  the  prevailing  understanding  of  Marx's 
theory,  that  some  of  the  defenders  of  the  "Master"  are 
driven  to  the  worn-out  expedient  of  declaring  that  he 
has  been  misrepresented — that  Marx  never  intended  to 
convey  the  impression  that  labor  is  the  source  of  all 
value.  The  most  plausible  of  all  Marx's  apologists, 
Spargo,  admits  that  at  the  famous  Convention  at  Gotha, 
in  1875,  the  German  Social  Democracy  (which  has 
always  been  of  the  accepted  Marxian  school)  declared 
in  their  programme  that  "labor  is  the  source  of  all 
wealth  and  culture ;"  but  Spargo  exultantly  points  out 
that  Marx  protested  and  claimed  that  nature  should 
be  included.  Nevertheless,  it  is  a  fact  that  this  declara- 
tion was  allowed  to  remain  in  the  programme  of  the 
German  Social  Democracy  for  many  years ;  and  it  has 


144  WHAT   IS    SOCIALISM? 

been  in  the  platform  of  many  other  Socialist  organiza- 
tions. It  is  now  too  late  in  the  day  to  deny  that  the 
general  view  among  the  rank  and  file  of  Marxian  So- 
cialists, and  also  of  many  (if  not  most)  of  their  intel- 
lectual leaders  was — and  is  now — that  all  value  to  com- 
modities is  given  thereto  by  labor — ''average"  labor,  if 
you  will,  but  by  labor  exclusively ;  and,  indeed,  many 
of  them  claim  that  this  value  attaches  only  to  manual 
labor.  One  of  the  most  learned  and  fairest-minded  of 
avowed  Socialists  living  is  Thomas  Kirkup,  the  author 
of  the  noted  article  on  Socialism  in  the  Encyclopedia 
Britannica.  In  his  History  of  Socialism  (edition  of 
1906)  he  says:  " .  .  .  It  is  obvious,  however,  that 
the  definition  of  labor  assumed  both  in  Ricardo  and 
Marx  is  too  narrow.  The  labor  they  broadly  posit  as 
the  source  of  wealth  is  manual  labor."  Socialist  litera- 
ture— especially  that  intended  for  the  consumption  of 
the  workingmen — teems  with  the  assertion  that  manual 
labor  is  to  be  credited  with  the  production  of  all  the 
wealth  of  the  world;  and  it  is  not  unfair  to  say  that 
Marx  himself  is  responsible  for  this  most  extraordinary 
kind  of  economic  doctrine,  it  being  the  only  logical  con- 
clusion of  his  teachings  and  of  the  general  argument  of 
his  theory  so  ponderously  and  voluminously  set  forth 
in  Capital,  and  still  earlier  in  his  Communist  Manifesto. 
The  German  Socialists  had  imbibed  their  Socialist  ideas 
from  these  two  works  years  before  they  formulated  the 
Gotha  programme.  Tbc  Manifesto  was  first  published 
in  1848;  the  first  German  edition  of  Capital  (the  first 
volume — the  only  one  issued  by  Marx  himself)  came 
out  in  1867;  and  the  Gotha  programme  was  not  adopted 
until  eight  \ears  afterwards.  Tbc  question  arises:  TTad 
not   Marx  modified  his  views  in  the  meantime?     It  cer- 


MARXIAN    SOCIALISM  145 

tainly  looks  that  way.  Through  what  is  known  as  the 
Bernstein  controversy,  in  regard  to  the  ever-increasing 
concentration  of  wealth  and  production,  much  doubt 
had  arisen  among  the  German  Social  Democracy  as  to 
the  soundness  of  the  Marxian  philosophy ;  and  in  an 
account  of  this  dispute  Prof.  Rae  makes  the  following 
interesting  observations  in  the  new  edition  (1908)  of 
Contemporary  Socialism : 

Now  while  things  have  thus  been  going  hard  with  the 
theory  of  social  revolution  by  historical  necessity,  which 
constitutes  one-half  of  the  Socialism  that  likes  to  call  itself 
scientific,  it  is  curious  that  the  Marxian  theory  of  value 
which  constitutes  the  other  half  of  it  has  been  found  to  have 
hern  thrown  overboard  by  Marx  himself.  It  was  only  meet 
that  the  master  should  suffer  his  bit  of  "intellectual  moult- 
ing'' as  well  as  the  disciples.  In  the  third  volume  of  his 
work  on  capital  [that  is,  the  third  volume  of  Capital]  which 
was  published  by  his  friend  Engels,  in  1894,  he  has  been 
obliged  to  admit  that  the  theory  in  question,  which  repre- 
sents value  to  be  the  product  of  labor  alone,  to  be  indeed 
nothing  but  the  quantity  of  labor  communicated  to  the  com- 
modity and  preserved  in  it,  is  not  really  true  of  value  as 
value  is  actually  constituted  in  this  world. 

"Surplus  Value." 

Now  we  are  getting  into  "the  heart  of  things"  in  the 
Marxian  system  of  Socialism. 

The  modern  concept  of  Socialism  centres  around  two 
ideas:  (1)  "surplus  value,"  and  (2)  "Collectivism." 
The  first  idea  conveys  the  insistence  that  the  wage- 
earner  is  robbed  of  what  rightfully  belongs  to  him — a 
certain  product  of  his  labor  which  belongs  to  him  and 
to  him  alone,  and  of  which  he  is  robbed  under  the  pres- 
ent capitalistic  system  by  his  employer ;  and  the  second 
idea  is  that  this  robbery  can  only  be  ended,  and  that 


146  what  is  socialism? 

the  worker  can  only  receive  the  full  product  of  his 
labor,  by  the  communal  ownership  and  control  of  the 
means  of  production,  distribution,  and  exchange.  Marx 
claims  that  Capitalism  is  founded  on  the  appropriation 
of  the  surplus  value  of  the  product  of  the  wage-earner 
— that  the  capitalist  gets  rich  by  this  exploitation  of  the 
worker. 

In  his  first  volume  of  Capital  Marx  thus  sets  out  his 
theory  of  surplus  value : 

In  every  kind  of  merchandise,  also  in  labor  capacity,  there 
is  a  distinction  between  use-value  and  exchange-value.  The 
exchange-value  of  labor  capacity  is  determined  by  the  aver- 
age quantity  of  labor  it  represents,  or  by  the  price  of  victuals 
ordinarily  required  for  its  sustenance.  In  labor  capacity 
there  is,  however,  also  a  certain  use-value,  a  gift  of  nature, 
without  cost  to  the  laborer,  but  very  remunerative  for  the 
capitalist. 

The  value  [exchange  value]  of  labor  capacity  is  therefore 
quite  a  different  thing  from  its  exploitation  in  actual  work 
[its  use-value | . 

This  difference  in  values  is  the  object  which  the  capitalist 
has  in  view  when  purchasing  'labor  capacity."  The  capitalist 
pays  merely  for  the  exchange-value  of  labor  capacity,  but 
what  he  aims  ai  obtaining  is  its  specific  use-value,  namely, 
its  power  of  prodi  ilues  exceeding  iis  own.     For  this 

specific  purpose  it  is  employed  by  the  capitalist,  who  acts 
therein  according  to  the  immutable  laws  of  exchange.  In 
fact,  the  seller  of  labor,  as  of  any  other  commodity,  realizes 
no  more  than  its  exchange  value  i.  c.,  he  is  paid  for  the 
ge- value  only  of  his  labor,  ami  yel  surrenders  its  en- 
tire use-value  to  the  purchasing  capitalist.  Me  cannot  receive 
the  price  foi  the  former  without  surrendering  the  latter. 
I  he  use  value  of  his  labor,  namely,  the  work  actually  done, 
belongs  to  the  seller  no  more  than  the  use-value  of  oil  sold 
belongs  to  tin-  oil  dealer.     The  capitalist  pa_\s   for  the  daily 

value  of   labor  capacitj    ami    then   claims  the   use  of  it   during 

the  entire  day,  or  the  work  of  ,-i  whole  day. 


MARXIAN    SOCIALISM  147 

Briefly,  and  in  simple  form,  the  theory  of  Marx  is 
this :  The  worker  can,  under  normal  conditions,  pro- 
duce a  value  equal  to  the  wages  paid  to  him  (which 
wages  are  only  sufficient  for  his  subsistence)  in  about 
half  the  time  he  labors: — that  is,  if  he  works,  say,  ten 
hours  he  earns  enough  in  five  to  sustain  him,  and,  as 
a  matter  of  fact,  he  is  only  paid  for  five  hours'  work ; 
then  there  are  five  hours  of  the  daily  labor  which  cre- 
ate surplus  value,  and  this  the  capitalist  appropriates. 
Shaffle  puts  it  this  way :  "The  worker  receives  in  wages 
(according  to  the  actual  doctrine  of  the  liberal  political 
economists)  on  an  average  not  the  full  productive  value 
of  his  day's  work,  but  very  much  less — in  fact,  only 
what  will  bring  him  the  absolute  necessaries  of  life.  He 
works  ten  or  twelve  hours,  while  perhaps  his  wage  is 
produced  in  six.  Whatever  he  may  produce  beyond  his 
necessaries  of  life  (the  so-called  surplus-value)  the  cap- 
italist pockets.  The  surplus-value  is  absorbed  in  daily 
driblets  by  the  great  sponge  of  capital,  becomes  the 
profits  of  the  capitalist,  and  eventually  an  accumulation 
of  capital.  ...  So  there  goes  on,  under  the  mask 
of  a  wage-system,  the  daily  and  hourly  exploitation  of 
the  wage-earners,  and  capital  becomes  a  vampire,  a 
money-grubber,  and  a  thief."  Says  Marx  :  "This  in- 
crement or  excess  over  the  original  value  I  call  surplus- 
value.*'  Commerce,  he  also  says,  "is  generally  cheat- 
ing." 

Capitalism. 

It  is  a  favorite  saying  of  Socialists  that  they  do  not 
desire  to  destroy  capital,  but  Capitalism.  Marx  con- 
ceives capital  as  "the  means  of  exploitation"  of  labor. 
A  bnefTelmltion~of  capital  by  Alfred  Marshall  is,  "that 


148  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

part  of  wealth  which  is  devoted  to  obtaining  further 
wealth."  In  their  Manifesto  Marx  and  Engels  say : 
"To  be  a  capitalist,  is  to  have  not  only  a  purely  per- 
sonal, but  a  social  status  in  production.  Capital  is  a 
collective  product,  and  only  by  the  united  action  of 
many  members,  nay,  in  the  last  resort,  only  by  the 
united  action  of  all  members  of  society,  can  it  be  set  in 
motion."  Then  Marx  and  Engels  explain  what  is 
meant  by  Socialists  when  they  say  that  they  do  not 
seek  to  destroy  the  thing  capital,  but  only  to  change  its 
social  relation,  under  Collectivism :  "When,  therefore, 
capital  is  converted  into  common  property,  into  the 
property  of  all  members  of  society,  personal  property 
is  not  thereby  transformed  into  social  property.  It  is 
only  the  social  character  of  the  property  that  is  changed. 
It  loses  its  class-character."  Under  the  present  system, 
according  to  the  Marxian  theory,  capital  is  increased 
by  the  following  methods :  ( i )  By  multiplying  the  num- 
ber of  workmen;  (2)  by  lengthening  the  working  hours; 
(3)  by  shortening  the  time  in  which  the  laborer  must 
work  to  produce  what  is  necessary  for  his  maintenance 
(which  according  to  Marx's  theory  fixes  his  wages), 
this  shortening  of  time  being  attained  by  improved 
methods  and  faster  and  more  efficient  machinery.  And 
this  brings  Marx  to  the  following  conclusion:  The 
greater  the  extent  to  which  machines  are  employed  and 
the  more  methods  are  improved — thus  increasing  the 
productivity  of  labor- — the  lower  wages  fall  and  the 
greater  the  profits  of  the  capitalist  becomes. 

One  of  the  most  noted  of  the  Fabian  Essays  is  "The 
Industrial  Basis  of  Socialism,"  by  William  Clarke.  This 
essay  describes  bow  the  capitalist  was  originally  a  busi- 
ness manager,  who   received  what  is  called  "wages  of 


Marxian  socialism  149 

superintendence,"  for  which  he  performed  real  func- 
tions; but  now  the  capitalist  employs  a  salaried  man- 
ager, and  he  himself  has  become  a  mere  rent  or  interest 
receiver,  he  being  paid  for  the  use  of  a  monopoly  which 
not  he  but  the  whole  people  created  by  their  joint 
efforts;  and  to  prevent  the  cutting  of  profits  capital  is 
"massed"  by  joint-stock  companies,  goods  are  produced 
by  machinery,  and  individual  industrialism  is  crushed 
out.     And  then  the  essayist  proceeds  to  say: 

The  manager's  business  is  to  earn  for  his  employers  the 
largest  dividends  possible;  if  he  does  not  do  so,  he  is  dis- 
missed. The  old  personal  relation  between  the  workers  and 
the  employer  is  gone;  instead  thereof  remains  merely  the 
cash  nexus.  To  secure  high  dividends,  the  manager  will 
lower  wages.  If  that  is  resisted  there  will  probably  be  either 
a  strike  or  lockout.  Cheap  labor  will  be,  perhaps,  imported 
by  the  manager;  and  if  the  work  people  resist  by  intimida- 
tion or  organized  boycotting,  the  forces  of  the  State  (which 
they  help  to  maintain)  will  be  used  against  them.  In  the 
majority  of  cases  they  must  submit.  Such  is  a  not  unfair 
picture  of  the  relation  of  capitalist  to  workman  to-day,  the 
former  having  become  an  idle  dividend  receiver. 

Collectivism. 

What  is  the  remedy  for  this  condition  of  affairs? 
Modern  Socialists  claim  that  there  is  only  one  remedy 
— Collectivism,  that  is,  the  public  (not  the  State,  as 
now  constituted)  ownership  and  control  of  the  means 
of  production,  distribution  and  exchange.  Modern  So- 
cialists put  aside  Paternal  or  State  Socialism,  Uto- 
pian Socialism  (or  'voluntary  communistic  organiza- 
tions), and  Trade  Unionism,  profit-sharing,  Co-opera- 
tion, land  nationalization,  a  reformed  system  of  taxa- 
tion, etc. :  all  these,  they  say,  are  all  right  in  their  way, 


ISO  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

but  at  the  best  are  merely  palliative  and  tentative ;  they 
claim  that  there  can  be  no  real  solution  of  the  labor 
problem  until  the  ax  is  laid  at  the  root  of  the  upas-tree 
of  Capitalism — until  private  capital  is  abolished,  and 
capital  is  owned  and  operated  by  the  community  for  the 
general  benefit  of  all. 

How  will  Collectivism  be  brought  about?  It  should 
ever  be  kept  in  mind  that  according  to  the  Marxian  the- 
ory this  change  from  the  private  to  the  public  ownership 
and  control  of  capital  is  to  come  not  by  the  mere  will 
of  humanity,  but  by  the  evolutionary  process  of  eco- 
nomic conditions,  and  that  this  process  is  even  now  and 
indeed  fast  developing  to  fruition ;  although  there  is 
wide  difference  of  views  as  to  when  the  Co-operative 
Commonwealth  will  be  established,  and  as  to  how  the 
change  will  come  about.  But  most  Socialists  profess  an 
absolute  faith  in  the  inevitableness  of  the  transforma- 
tion ;  to  them  it  is  as  irresistible  as  fate  itself ;  it  will 
come  because  it  must  come,  and  not  necessarily  because 
it  oit^ht  to  come.  They  concede  that  legislative  and 
State  action  can  oil  the  wheels  of  the  machine,  can 
make  it  run  easier,  and  might  hasten  the  day  of  Jubi- 
lee; but  they  claim  that  all  the  parliaments  of  the  world 
combined,  and  all  the  Czars  and  Bismarcks  that  may  yet 
arise  to  dominate  the  autocracies  and  bureaucracies  of 
the  world,  cannot  prevent  the  coming  triumph  of  Social- 
ism. 

The  "Industrial  Revolution." 

Capitalism  as  a  system,  in  the  modern  understanding 
of  the  term,  tool;  on  definite  shape  as  an  outcome  of 
whal  Socialists  call  the  "industrial  revolution."  Ac- 
cording to  the  Marxian  argument,  this  "industrial  revo- 


MARXIAN    SOCIALISM  151 

lution"  brought  about  the  necessity  for  Socialism.    There 
is  no  controversy  as  to  the  fact  of  the  "industrial  revo- 
lution."    It  occurred  at  the  close  of  the  eighteenth  cen- 
tury, and  was  caused  by  the  introduction  of  machinery 
and  the  "socialization"   of   industries,   as   it   is  called — 
that   is,   by   the  organization  of  industry,  the   establish- 
ment of  factories,  and  the  division  of  labor,  instead  of 
the  workman,  as  formerly,  producing  commodities  indi- 
vidually, completing  an  article  from  start  to  finish.     This 
"industrial     revolution"    swept    manufactures    into    the 
hands  of  the  capitalist  class,   and   the  individual,   inde- 
pendent workman,  owning  his  own  means  of  production, 
disappeared.      There    had    been    capitalism    of    another 
kind  before — that  is,  there  had  been  systems  of  accumu- 
lation of  wealth,  some  of  which  had  been  used  for  the 
production    of    other    wealth.      Marx    denied    that    the 
secret    of   primitive   accumulation    was    thrift    and    dili- 
gence as  against  extravagance  and  laziness.     "The  truth 
is,"  he   says,  "that  historically   everything   is   conquest, 
brutality,  robbery — in  a  word,  force.     Primitive  accumu- 
lation is  the  separation  by  force  of  the  producer  from 
the  means  of  production."    The  wage-laborer  is  an  evo- 
lution  of   economic    society.      There    was    in    turn :    the 
ancient  slave ;  the  serf ;  the  guild-worker ;  the  individual, 
independent    worker,    owning   his    own    means    of    pro- 
duction ;  and  lastly,  there  is  the  wage-earner,  whose  only 
asset  is  his  "labor-power,"  and  who  has  to  sell  that  to 
the  capitalist   for  the  bare  means  of  subsistence,  while 
at  the  same  time  he  has  to  turn  over  to  the  capitalist 
for  nothing  the  "surplus  value"  above   and  beyond  hi< 
subsistence.     As  to  the  industrial  capitalist,   Marx  sa\  - 
that  he.  on  his  part,  had  (  1 )  to  fight  the  feudal  lord;  (2) 
to  fight  the  guilds;  (3)  to  rob  the  laborer  of  the  means 


152  WHAT   IS    SOCIALISM? 

of  production.     The  transformation  of  feudal  exploita- 
tion into  capitalistic  exploitation  began,  here  and  there, 
in  certain  of  the  Mediterranean  towns,  as  early  as  the 
fourteenth  or  fifteenth  century;  but  formally,  the  capi- 
talistic  era   dates    from   the   sixteenth   century.     When 
feudalism  disappeared,  the  bulk  of  the  population  were 
free  peasant-proprietors;   and  what  wage-earners  there 
were  generally  owned  a  little  land  and  their  cottage,  and 
fed  their  stock  on  the  common  land,  from  which,  also, 
they  took  the  wood  they  needed  for  fuel.     Then  in  the 
latter  end  of  the  fifteenth  century  and  the  commence- 
ment of  the  sixteenth  the  feudal  lords  drove  the  peas- 
ants from  their  possessions  and  stole  the  common  lands, 
and   the   dispossessed   and   wandering  ex-retainers   and 
ex-peasant-proprietors   were,  the  first  proletarians.     By 
the  end  of  the  eighteenth  century  the  independent  yeo- 
manry had  vanished,  and  by  1800  the  last  trace  of  the 
common    land    of   the    agricultural    laborer    was    gone. 
Marx   says  that  the   English  oligarchy   of   to-day   was 
founded  on  the  spoliation  of  the  Church  and  the  theft 
of  the  State  lands  from  the  peasantry.     In  tracing  the 
development  of  the  "capitalist  farmer,"  Marx  observes: 
"The  lion's  share  always  falls  to  the  middleman.     Ex- 
amples—financiers,    merchants,     shopkeepers,     lawyers, 
M.  P.'s,  priests."    When  the  factory  system  came,  there 
came  a  new  social  order :  on  the  one  side  Capitalism ;  on 
the  other  side  1  'mletarianism.     Socialists  claim  that  the 
proletarians,     the     wage-earners,     are     really     economic 
slaves.      Now:      "Self-earned    private    property,    that   is 
based,  so  to  say,  on  the  fusing  together  of  the  isolated. 
independent   laboring   individual   with   the  conditions  of 
his  labpr,  is  supplanted  by  capitalistic  private  property, 


MARXIAN    SOCIALISM  153 

which   rests  on   the  exploitation  of  the  nominally   free 
labor  of  others,  i.  e.,  on  wages-labor." 

But  there  is  still  a  further  evolutionary  development 
of  the  economic  relations  between  Capital  and  Labor  in 
the  assumed  inevitable  march  to  Collectivism.  The 
large  capitalists  begin  to  attack  the  smaller :  "One  cap- 
italist always  kills  many."  Parallel  with  the  relative 
ever-diminishing  number  of  small,  individual  capital- 
ists— as  claimed  by  the  Marxists — and  with  the  increase 
of  the  strength  of  the  capitalism  of  the  remaining 
monopolists,  trusts,  and  combines,  there  is  "a  growing 
mass  of  misery,  oppression,  slavery,  degradation,  exploita- 
tion ;  but  with  this,  too,  grows  the  revolt  of  the  work- 
ing class,  a  class  always  increasing  in  numbers,  and 
disciplined,  united,  organized,  by  the  very  mechanism 
of  the  process  of  capitalist  production  itself."  Re- 
ferring to  the  gobbling  up  of  the  small  and  individual 
capitalists  by  the  large  and  combined  capitalists,  Marx 
exclaims  with  exultant  sarcasm,  "The  knell  of  capitalist 
property  sounds.  The  expropriators  are  expropriated ! 
The  capitalist  mode  of  appropriation,  the  result  of  the 
capitalist  mode  of  production,  produces  capitalist  pri- 
vate property."  Marx  argues,  and  present-day  Social- 
ists boast,  that  the  formation  of  the  vast  commercial 
combines  and  industrial  trusts  are  not  an  obstacle  but 
almost  a  condition-precedent  for  the  introduction  of 
Socialism.  Says  Marx :  "The  transformation  of  scat- 
tered private  property,  arising  from  individual  labor, 
into  capitalist  private  property,  is,  naturally,  a  process 
incomparably  more  protracted,  violent,  and  difficult, 
than  the  transformation  of  capitalistic  private  property, 
already  practically  resting  on  socialized  production,  into 


154  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

socialized  property.  In  the  former  cases  we  had  the 
expropriation  of  the  mass  of  the  people  by  a  few 
usurpers ;  in  the  latter,  we  have  the  expropriation  of  a 
few  usurpers  by  the  mass  of  the  people."  Stripped  of 
verbiage,  Marx  means  by  this  that  the  establishment 
of  Socialism  will  be  easier  than  was  the  establishment 
of  the  present  system  of  Capitalism. 

How  Will  Collectivism  be  Established? 

After    diligently    and    laboriously    groping    his    way 
through  the  ponderosities  of  Marxian  Socialism  to  the 
stage  where  it  is  mathematically  demonstrated  that  Cap- 
italism must  collapse  and  Collectivism  must  come  as  an 
irresistible   economic   evolution,   the    faithful    student   at 
last  reaches  "the  jumping-off  place."     According  to  that 
most    delightfully    inconsistent    of   all    Socialist   writers, 
H.  G.  Wells.  Socialism  is  exchanging  "New  Worlds  for 
Old."     But  how  is  the  exchange  to  come  about?     Be- 
hind  him,   the   student   sees  the  bleak,   cruel   desert  of 
Capitalism;    in    front   of   him    lies    the    fruitful,    joyous 
garden   of   Socialism.      How    is   the   weary   traveller  to 
cross  the  intervening  yawning  chasm,  the  dividing  tor- 
rent?    Is  he  to  reach  the  promised  land  by  being  borne 
over  liv   a   catastrophic   upheaval,  by   one   Titanic  pro- 
pulsive   explo  ion   of  the   forces  of  nature?     Or,  is  he, 
slowly   ami    laboriously,    with    much    halting   and  many 
et-backs,   t<>   struggle  onward,   ploddingly,   progressing 
tep  I'      tep  across  the  valley   of  tribulation  and  despair; 
and   then,  when  oul   <>i   the  depths,  to  make  the  ascent 
i(.   the  other   side,   climbing    upwards   literally    inch    by 
iip  It.   digging   his  bleeding   hands   and   feet   into  the   jar 
ipitou      .mil    rocky    ledges,    until    he    finally    reaches    the 
top,     and     then     to     pass,     exhausted,     hut     triumphant, 


MARXIAN    SOCIALISM  155 

through  the  golden   shining  gateway  into  the   Paradise 
of  the  world's  toilers — Collectivism? 

One  can  search  the  whole  range  of  Modern  Socialist 
literature  without  finding  an  adequate  answer.  To  ask 
the  question  is  foolishness;  to  attempt  to  answer  it  is 
still  greater  foolishness:  Such  is  the  Modern  Socialist 
position.  Confessedly,  nobody  of  authority  pretends  to 
be  able  to  give  a  satisfactory  answer.  But  there  are 
Socialists  who,  while  they  will  not  undertake  to  lay 
down  a  programme,  will  go  so  far  as  to  suggest  how 
Collectivism  may  be  brought  about.  If  objections  are 
made  thereto,  then  these  Socialists  calmly  say,  as  if  the 
subject  is  not  of  much  importance,  anyhow,  "Very  well, 
we  won't  discuss  the  matter.  We'll  concede  all  you  say, 
if  you  like ;  all  we  know  is  that  in  some  way  Collectiv- 
ism will  be  brought  about!"  The  great  trouble  is,  they 
say,  that  nobody  who  is  not  a  Marxian  Socialist  under- 
stands Marxian  Socialism!  And  without  a  trace  of  sar- 
casm it  might  be  remarked  that  those  who  are  so  gifted 
with  intelligence  as  to  be  able  to  understand  Marxian 
Socialism,  understand  it  in  so  many  different  ways  as 
to  be  quite  confusing  to  ordinary  mortals.  Of  all  the 
American  expounders  of  Marxian  Socialism,  from  a 
professedly  Marxian  standpoint,  the  most  pretentious 
exponent — and  the  adjective  is  not  used  in  an  offensive 
sense — is  Ernest  Cntermann.  the  editor  of  the  new 
American  edition  of  the  three  first  volumes  of  Capital. 
He  complains  that  "the  professors  of  the  ruling  class 
have  never  been  able  to  distinguish  between  a  scheme 
and  a  historical  process."  That  is  the  old  complaint  of 
the  Marxians.  They  set  aside  Utopian  Socialism  and 
State  Socialism  as  "mere  schemes,"  and  they  speak  of 
Marxian  Socialism  as  "n  historical  development."     Still, 


156  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISE 

even  Mr.  Untermann  recognizes  the  requirement  of 
saying  something  about  the  manner  of  the  transforma- 
tion from  Individualism  to  Collectivism ;  and  this  is  his 
explanation  (Marxian  Economics)  : 

The  antagonism  between  exploiters  and  exploited  becomes 
more  and  more  intense.  It  is  transferred  from  the  economic 
to  the  political  field.  Organized  by  the  requirements  of  capi- 
talist production  itself,  the  proletariat  adapts  its  economic 
organizations  to  the  form  of  modern  centralized  industries, 
transforms  its  craft  unions  into  industrial  unions,  unites  its 
economic  and  political  organizations  in  a  well-planned  divi- 
sion of  labor,  conquers  the  political  power,  and  enables  its 
economic  organizations  to  take  hold  of  the  great  sources  of 
production  and  distribution  in  the  interest  of  the  working 
class,  which  remains  the  sole  essential  class  in  society. 

As  soon  as  the  working  class  controls  the  nation  econom- 
ically and  politically,  it  inaugurates  a  system  of  collective 
production,  in  which  the  producers  control  their  means  of 
life,  determine  their  own  share  in  the  co-operatively  pro- 
duced articles,  and  remove  all  obstacles  to  a  full  human  de- 
velopment.    Capitalism   leaves  the  field  to   Socialism. 

There  is  unanimity  among  all  schools  of  Socialists 
that  the  first  thing  for  the  proletariat  to  do  is  to  "seize 
the  political  power ;"  and  then,  in  the  language  of  Lieb- 
knecht,  "Down  with  the  wage  system  I"  Listen  to  the 
"Masters,"  Marx  and  Engels  themselves,  in  their  Mani- 
festo: .  .  .  "The  first  step  in  the  revolution  by  the 
working  class,  h  to  raise  the  proletariat  to  the  position 
(if  ruling  class,  to  win  the  battle  of  democracy.  The 
proletariat  will  use  its  political  supremacy,  to  wrest,  by 
degrees,  all  capital  from  the  bourgeoisie,  to  concentrate 
all  instruments  of  production  in  the  hands  of  the  State, 
i.  r ..  of  the  proletariat  organized  as  the  ruling  class;  and 


MARXIAN    SOCIALISM  157 

to  increase  the  total  of  productive  forces  as  rapidly  as 
possible." 

Hillquit  argues  that  in  the  general  scheme  of  Social- 
ism, the  modern  State  has  the  very  important  mission 
of  paving  the  way  for  the  transition  from  private  to 
collective  ownership ;  but  he  confesses — and  here  he  dif- 
fers from  most  Marxians — that  the  transformation  will 
be  by  no  means  a  simple  task. 

The  same  writer  touches  upon  a  phase  of  this  ques- 
tion which  is  generally  avoided  by  cautious  "Intellec- 
tual" Socialists — that  of  compensation  for  private  prop- 
erty turned  into  public  ownership.  It  is  very  significant, 
however,  that  in  much  of  the  current  Socialist  literature 
intended  for  the  consumption  of  the  working  class,  the 
doctrine  of  confiscation  is  boldly  preached.  Hillquit 
observes  that  the  "Socialist  programme"  is  silent  upon 
this  point,  although  he  claims  that  "the  greater  number 
of  Socialist  writers  incline  towards  compensation ;"  but 
he  adds  that  in  this  they  merely  express  their  individual 
present  preferences.  He  draws  attention  to  the  fact  that 
the  French  clergy  were  not  compensated  for  the  lands 
taken  from  them  by  the  bourgeoisie  revolution,  and  that 
the  Russian  noblemen  and  the  American  owners  were 
not  paid  upon  the  emancipation  of  their  serfs  and  slaves. 
It  is  evident  that  Hillquit  is  not  shocked  by  the  possi- 
bility of  confiscation  under  Socialism. 

Dr.  Schaffle  (Quintessence  of  Socialism)  explains 
that  Socialism  would  probably  take  over  private  indus- 
tries one  after  another,  and  organize  them  upon  a  pub- 
lic basis,  and  that  "it  might  begin  by  taking  only  those 
branches  of  industry  which  are  already  carried  on  on  a 
large  scale,  and  consolidating  them   into  uniform   pro- 


158  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

ductive  public  bodies  under  State  regulation  and  in- 
spection. " 

Notwithstanding  that  Morris  and  Bax  are  strongly 
Marxian,  they  declare  that  die  "catastrophic"  theory  of 
the  collapse  of  private  capitalistic  ownership  and  the 
sudden  transformation  of  .industries  into  Collective 
property,  is  a  "ridiculous  assumption;"  and  they  suggest 
that  there  should  be  the  acquirement  by  municipalities 
and  trade  organizations  of  the  industries  of  the  country. 
This  has  not  only  been  the  theory  but  has  been  the  prin- 
ciple of  action  of  both  the  English  (Fabian)  and  the 
French  Socialists ;  and  Enrico  Ferri,  a  leader  of  the 
Italian  Socialists,  urges  that  the  conquest  of  political 
power  by  the  Socialists  must  primarily  come  through 
the  municipalities.     (Socialism  and  Positive  Science.) 

Spargo  confesses  that  "omniscience  would  be  neces- 
sary" to  tell  how  Socialism  would  be  established ;  and 
in  this  connection  he  gives  the  following  personal  rem- 
iniscence in  Socialism: 

Those  who  arc  familiar  with   the  writings  of   Marx  know 
that,  in  e  contrast   with   the   fundamental  principles  of 

that  theory  of  social  evolution  which  he  so  well  developed, 
he  lap  ed  at  times  into  the  Utopian  habit  of  predicting  the 
sudden  transformation  of  society.  Capitalism  was  to  end 
in  a     re  I  final  phe"  and  the  new  order  be  born  in 

the  travail  of  a  "  ocial  revolution."  1  remember  that  when 
I  joined  the  Socialist  movement,  many  years  ago,  the  Social 
olution  was  a  very  real  event,  inevitable  and  nigh  at 
hand,  to  most  of  us.  The  more  enthusiastic  of  us  dreamed 
of  it;  we  sang  songs  in  the  spirit  of  the  Chans*  m  Revolu- 
iiona  ne  of  which,  a     [  re<  ill,  told  plainly  enough  what 

•    would  do — 

"When  the  Revolution  comes  " 
Some  comrades   actus  nted   to   have  military   drill   at 

i  is  meetings,  merely  that   we  might  be  ready  for 


MARXIAN    SOCIALISM  159 

tlie  Revolution,  which  might  occur  any  Mond 
or  Friday  afternoon.  Jf  this  seems  strange  and  comic  as  i 
relate  it  to-day,  please  remember  that  we  were  very  few 
and  very  young,  and,  therefore,  very  sure  that  we  were  to 
redeem  the  world.  We  lived  in  a  state  of  revolutionary 
ecstasy.  Some  of  us,  I  think,  must  have  gone  regularlj  to 
sleep  in  the  mental  state  of  Tennyson's  May  Queen,  with 
words  equivalent  to  her  childish  admonition — 

"If   you're    waking    call    me    early," 
so  fearful  were   we  that  the  Revolution  might  start  without 
us! 

Here  again,  Socialism  sings  two  songs — one  to  the 
"intellectuals,"  and  the  other  to  the  proletariat :  for, 
most  certainly  the  old  Marxian  theory  still  holds  its 
sway  in  most  popular  presentations  of  Socialism.  The 
same  is  true  as  to  compensation  and  confiscation : — the 
learned  text-books  attempt  to  smooth  matters  over  by 
saying  that  in  democratically-governed  countries  in 
which  Socialism  will  be  established  without  a  revolution, 
there  will  probably  be  compensation  for  property  taken 
over ;  but  in  speeches  and  newspapers  and  cheap  publica- 
tions intended  for  working  men,  confiscation  is  not  only 
uggested  but  is  often  boldly  defended. 

The  Co-operative  Commonwealth. 

Necessarily,  the  organization  and  administration  of 
the  Co-operative  Commonwealth  would  depend  largely 
upon  the  extent  to  which  the  principle  of  Collectivism 
would  be  applied.  Here  again  we  are  confronted  by  a 
great  divergence  among  Socialists.  Among  their  lead- 
ing writers  of  the  present  day  the  prevailing  opinion 
seems  to  be  that  quite  apart  from  mere  personal  be- 
longings, it  would  not  be  practical  for  the  State  to  own 
and  control  all  the  means  of  production.     There  is,  how- 


160  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

ever,  a  general  agreement  that  the  following  should  be 
included  within  public  socialization:  (i)  All  natural 
resources — land,  mines,  forests,  water-ways,  oil  wells, 
etc.;  (2)  means  of  public  transportation — railroads, 
canals,  street  cars,  etc.;  (3)  means  of  communication — 
telegraphs,  telephones,  and  wireless  telegraphy;  (4)  all 
"Socialized"  industrial  operations,  particularly  those  in- 
volving large  capital,  and  even  more  especially  those 
which  are  in  their  nature  monopolies,  or  which  have 
come  under  the  control  of  trusts  and  combinations;  (5) 
all  such  other  works  and  functions  as  are  now  under 
public  ownership  and  control. 

In  regard  to  the  abstract  principle  of  Collectivism, 
that  in  itself  is  a  comparatively  simple  matter.  It  is  in 
the  application  of  that  principle,  and  the  administration 
of  the  consequent  organized  system,  that  the  greatest 
difficulties  arise,  even  when  treated  theoretically.  Many 
Socialist  authorities  loftily  brush  aside  all  questions 
relating  even  to  the  possible  framework  of  the  organ- 
ization and  administration  of  the  Co-operative  Com- 
monwealth ;  and  some  of  them  ignore  the  question  of 
details  but  undertake  to  outline  the  form  which  the 
Socialist  State  may  likely  take.  When  anti-Socialist 
objections  are  raised,  then  the  always-ready  answer  is 
made  that  Socialism  is  a  principle  and  not  a  scheme. 
With  regard  to  the  principle  of  Collectivism  itself,  there 
has  been,  at  any  rate,  a  certain  standard,  and,  indeed, 
creed,  with  Marx  as  the  authority  and  prophet.  But, 
having  bequeathed  to  his  followers  the  Socialist  State, 
Marx  leaves  them  to  their  own  devices.  Modern  So- 
cialism disdains  Utopianism— it  is  contrary  to  its  very 
genius  to  idealize  about  anything;  it  simply  provides  for 
overturning  the  existing  political,   social,   and   economic 


MARXIAN    SOCIALISM  161 

systems,  and  securing  possession  of  all  productive  capi- 
tal; and  the  rest  is  in  the  womb  of  the  future.  In  their 
Manifesto,  Marx  and  Engels  proclaim  that  the  Social- 
ists "openly  declare  that  their  ends  can  be  attained  only 
by  the  forcible  overthrow  of  all  existing  social  condi- 
tions." The  two  most  prominent  leaders  of  German 
Social  Democracy  say  the  same  thing,  Liebknecht  de- 
claring that  they  demand  "a  radical  abolition  of  the 
present  social  order,"  and  Bebel  announcing  that  they 
intend  to  "make  a  clean  sweep." 

Socialism  as  Affecting  Religion  and  the  Family. 

Here  arises  a  fundamental  difference  between  two 
distinct  schools  of  Marxian  Socialists,  not  to  speak  of 
those  Socialists  who  decline  to  be  so  labelled.  One 
school  hold  that  the  application  of  Marxian  principles 
will  have  only  economic  effects.  They  confine  the 
"materialistic  conception  of  history"  and  the  interpre- 
tation of  the  forces  making  for  Socialism  purely  to  "the 
bread  and  butter"  problem ;  they  limit  the  principles  of 
Socialism  and  Collectivism  altogether  to  material 
things ;  to  them  Socialism  means  that  instead  of  private 
property  there  will  be  public  property — that  instead  of 
wages  there  will  be  "an  equitable  apportionment"  to 
every  worker  of  the  products  of  his  labor,  or  a  distri- 
bution of  the  general  product  according  to  his  individual 
needs — and  to  them  Socialism  means  nothing  more, 
except,  of  course,  a  democratic  form  of  government.  It 
is  fair  to  say  that  this  is  the  publicly-declared  attitude 
of  most  of  the  organized  Political  Socialist  parties 
throughout  the  world  within  recent  years ;  but  it  is  not 
unfair  also  to  say  that  the  organized  Socialists  have 
been  driven  into  this  position  by  reason  of  the  attacks 


162  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

which  have  been  made  upon  them  on  the  ground  that 
the  adoption  or  the  coming  into  being-  of  Socialism 
would  mean  the  complete  overthrow  of  the  present 
social  state  as  affecting  religion,  the  family,  and  partic- 
ularly the  marriage  relation.  The  exact  point  at  issue 
is  often  misunderstood  by  critics  of  Socialism.  There 
have  been  Socialists  who  have  cried  "Down  with 
religion !"  or  "Abolish  the  family !"  or  "Let's  have  free 
love !"  There  may  be  such  who  demanded  these  things 
from  sheer  perversity  or  depravity  of  nature ;  but  such 
men,  it  is  proper  to  say.  form  an  infinitesimal  minority 
even  among  "extreme"  Socialists.  The  question  really 
resolves  itself  into  that  of  the  inherent  and  inevitable 
all-embracive  evolutionary  principle  of  Socialism  as 
defined  by  Marx  and  Engels. 

There  are  a  large  number  of  Socialists — the  second 
school  of  Marxians  referred  to — who  extend  the  prin- 
ciple or  doctrine  of  the  "materialistic  conception  of  his- 
tory" into  every  relation  of  life,  social,  ethical  and  relig- 
ious, as  well  as  economic  and  political.  And  it  cannot 
be  denied  that  these  latter  interpreters  of  Marxism  have 
included  the  great  majority  of  the  recognized  intellec- 
tual leaders  of  the  movement.  They  ridicule  the  idea 
that  the  spirit  and  philosophy  of  Socialism  are  to  be  con- 
fined solely  to  the  matter  of  the  production  of  goods 
and  the  apportionment  of  the  products  of  Labor.  To 
them  Socialism  means  vastly  more  than  a  wholesale  co- 
operative scheme;  they  believe  that  Socialism  is  ail- 
inclusively  Sociological,  and  not  exclusively  Economic. 
This  is  true  not  only  of  the  original  Marxian  Socialists, 
but  is  true  of  the  brainiest  of  the  Socialist  leaders  to-day. 
They  naturally  have  a  feeling  of  contempt  for  the  com- 
promising and  apologetic  attitude  adopted  by  some  So- 


MARXIAN    SOCIALISM  163 

cialist  writers  whose  self-imposed  mission  is  to  brush 
away  difficulties  and  to  smooth  off  the  rough  edges  of 
their  cult  as  originally  presented,  and  to  form  Political 
Socialist  organizations  whose  main  object  is,  for  the  time 
being,  to  catch  votes.  One  has  only  to  read  current 
Socialist  literature  to  see  plenty  of  manifestations  of  this 
sentiment. 

It  is  not  the  primary  purpose  of  the  writer  to  present 
an  argument  against  Socialism  by  showing  that  in  its 
very  essence  and  its  consequence  it  is  both   irreligious 
and  immoral ;  but  no  adequate  presentation  of  Socialism 
can  be  made  which  suppresses  or  glosses  over  the  ques- 
tion of  its  relation  to  religion  and  social  ethics.     There 
are   the   very   highest   authorities    for   this   position — no 
less  authorities  than  Marx  and  Engels  themselves.     In 
the  preface  to  his  Criticism  of  Political  Economy  Marx 
says :     "The  method  of  production  in  our  material  life 
shapes  and  determines  also  our  entire  social,  political, 
and  intellectual  process  of  life.     It  is  not  the  mind  of 
man  which  determines  his  life  in   society,  but,  on   the 
contrary,    it   is   this    life   which    determines   his   mind." 
Engels    tells    us:     "At    the    root    of    the    materialistic 
conception    of    history    there    is    the    proposition    that 
production,     and     next     to    production     the     exchange 
of    products,    forms    the    base    of    social    order.     .     .     . 
Accordingly,    the    ultimate    causes    of    social    changes 
and    of    political     revolutions    are    not    to    be    looked 
for  in  the  brains  of  men  and  in  their  growing  compre- 
hension of  eternal  truth  and  justice,  but  in  the  changes 
affecting    the    manner    of    production    and    exchange." 
Speaking  at  the  grave  of  Marx,  Engels  declared  that  as 
Darwin  had  discovered  the  law  of  evolution  in  organic 
nature,  so  Marx  had  in  the  history  of  mankind,  and  he 


164  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

expounded  the  Marxian  Materialistic  doctrine  to  mean 
that  "the  production  of  the  immediate  material  means 
of  life  and  the  corresponding  stage  of  economic  evolu- 
tion of  a  nation  or  epoch  forms  the  foundation  from 
which  the  civil  institutions  of  the  people  in  question, 
their  ideas  of  law,  of  art,  of  religion  even,  have  been 
developed  and  according  to  which  they  are  to  be  ex- 
plained— and  not  the  reverse,  as  has  been  done  hereto- 
fore." 

Prof.  Richard  T.  Ely  (University  of  Wisconsin)  may 
be  described  as  a  "Collectivist  Opportunist,"  as  prac- 
tically a  Fabian  of  a  modified  degree.  He  denies  being 
a  Socialist,  as  the  term  is  accepted,  and  certainly  he  is 
not  a  Marxian ;  but  he  is  recognized  as  an  absolutely 
fair  and  a  discriminating  exponent  of  all  schools.  In 
his  standard  work,  Socialism  and  Social  Reform,  he 
says  that  Marx  "made  Socialism  a  philosophy  of  every 
department  of  social  life."  And  he  goes  on  to  state 
that  "Socialism,  to  the  strict  Marxist,  means  a  concep- 
tion of  religion,  of  literature,  and  of  science,  as  well  as 
of  an  economic  philosophy."  This,  he  explains,  "is  a 
natural  consequence  of  his  (Marx's)  materialistic  con- 
ception of  history,"  which,  however,  he  styles  "an  anti- 
quated philosophy." 

Without  any  reflection  on  their  personal  morality,  it 
is  only  stating  a  self-confessed  fact  that  in  the  ordinary 
acceptation  of  the  word,  Marx  and  Engcls  were  athe- 
ists. In  his  Landmarks  of  Scientific  Socialism  Engels 
declares  that  "religion  is  nothing  but  the  fantastic  reflec- 
tion  in  men's  minds  of  the  external  forces  which  domi- 
nate their  every-day  existence,  a  reflection  in  which 
earthly  forces  take  the  form  of  the  supernatural."  In 
Engel's  view,  religion  is  nothing  but  the  outcome  of  the 


MARXIAN    SOCIALISM  165 

economic  conditions  arising  from  the  present  capitalis- 
tic system  !  His  argument  is  involved,  but  stripped  of 
philosophical  terminology,  it  is  that  man  seeks  religion 
when  he  is  not  master  of  his  own  destiny — that,  as  he 
is  a  "slave,"  under  the  present  capitalistic  system,  so 
therefore  he  seeks  religion ;  but  that  when  Socialism  is 
established,  then  man  will  be  "free,"  and  then  the  very 
reason  for  the  existence  of  religion  will  disappear!  This 
argument  was  written  in  reply  to  the  work  of  another 
Socialist  who  had  advocated  that  when  the  Socialist 
Commonwealth  was  established,  religion  should  be  for- 
bidden. But  why,  asked  Engels,  forbid  a  thing  which 
would  die  a  natural  death? — as,  in  his  opinion,  religion 
must,  under  Socialism. 

If  the  reader  turns  to  the  Manifesto  of  Marx  and 
Engels — the  epitome  of  Modern  Socialism — he  will  find 
a  number  of  references  to  religion  and  the  family ;  and 
the  authors  acknowledge  that  Socialists  are  charged 
with  the  intention  to  abolish  both.  What  is  their  reply? 
They  do  not  deny  the  charge,  but  they  indulge  in  some 
cynical  remarks  condemnatory  of  the  prevailing  relig- 
ious ideas  and  of  the  marriage  and  family  relationship, 
which  they  say  are  part  of  "the  social  consciousness  of 
past  ages  .  .  .  which  cannot  completely  vanish 
except  with  the  total  disappearance  of  class  antagon- 
isms." It  is  difficult  to  come  to  any  other  conclusion 
after  reading  their  Manifesto  than  that  Marx  and  En- 
gels believed  that  the  establishment  of  their  Socialist 
State  would  inevitably  lead  to  the  disappearance  of  what 
is  understood  as  orthodox  religion,  and,  indeed,  to  a 
non-recognition  of  any  supernatural  or  providential  in- 
tervention in  human  affairs;  and  that  it  would  also 
mean  the  abolition  of  the  permanent  monogamic  mar- 


i66  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

riage  relation  and  of  the  family  as  now  constituted. 
These  changes — which  would,  indeed,  be  "catastrophic" 
— would  come  about,  it  should  be  carefully  noted,  in  the 
natural  course  of  economic  and  social  evolution,  accord- 
ing to  the  strict,  unadulterated  Marxian  theory  of  Sci- 
entific Socialism.  It  is  true  that  there  are  Socialists 
like  Thomas  Kirkup  who  believe  that  Socialism  will  be 
"purified"  as  to  both  its  economics  and  its  ethics ;  there 
are  those  like  Spargo  who  make  special  pleadings  and 
apologetics  for  this  phase  of  Socialism ;  and  there  are 
also  Socialist  political  organizations  which  change  their 
flag  according  to  national  prejudices,  or  shift  it  to  catch 
passing  breezes,  and  are  prepared  to  change  their  creed 
to  suit  the  fickle  proletariat ;  but  it  is  nevertheless  true 
that  nearly  all  the  commanding  intellects  of  Modern 
Socialism,  from  Owen,  Marx  and  Engels  down  to  the 
present-day  leaders,  hold  to  the  doctrine :  first,  that 
Socialism  affects  all  human  affairs — ethical  as  well  as 
economic;  and  secondly,  that  under  Socialism  religion 
will  die  a  natural  death  (or  will  be  suppressed  forcibly), 
and  that  there  will  be  a  revolution  in  the  present  mar- 
riage and   family  relationship. 

Speaking  for  the  German  Social  Democracy  in  the 
Reichstag,  on  September  16,  1878,  Bebel  said:  "Gen- 
tlemen, you  attack  our  views  on  religion  because  they 
are  atheistic  and  materialistic.  I  acknowledge  the  cor- 
rectness of  the  impeachment.  .  .  .  I  am  fairly  con- 
vinced that   Socialism  finally  leads  to  atheism." 

Socialism  Involves  Ethics  as  Well  as  Economics. 

Morris  and  I'.ax  boldly  asserl  that  under  the  Socialist 
order  the  particulars  of  life  concerning  marriage  and 
the  family  would  be  affected  not  only  economically,  but 


MARXIAN    SOCIALISM  167 

in  ethics.  They  join  in  the  common  Socialist  argu- 
ment that  at  present  the  married  woman  is  "an  eco- 
nomic slave,"  she  being-  a  dependent  of  her  husband ; 
but  they  say  that  Socialism  would  bring-  about  a  condi- 
tion of  "freedom."  As  a  logical  consequence,  they 
argue,  according  to  the  doctrine  of  "the  materialistic 
conception  of  history,"  the  marriage  relation  would  also 
become  "free,"  in  this:  that  a  new  development  would 
take  place  from  which  would  ensue  a  relationship  be- 
tween a  man  and  a  woman  based  "on  mutual  inclina- 
tion and  affection,  an  association  terminable  at  the  will 
of  either  party.  .  .  .  There  would  be  no  vestige  of 
reprobation  weighing  on  the  dissolution  of  one  tie  and 
the  forming  of  another."  (Socialism,  Its  Growth  and 
Outcome.) 

In  the  Open  Review  (London),  of  July,  1909,  Bax 
had  an  article  on  "Definitions  of  Socialism,"  in  which 
he  vigorously  protested  against  the  recent  tendency  "to 
narrow  down  the  definition  of  Socialism  too  exclusively 
and  too  formally  to  the  central  economic  issue."  As 
Bax  is  generally  recognized  as  the  most  profound  of 
all  living  Marxian  Socialists  in  the  English-speaking 
world,  his  article  is  partly  quoted : 

.     .     .     The  attempt  to  define   Socialism   by  a  pur.  I     ■ 
nomic  formula  is  not  merely  logically  invalid  and  tinsuppi 
by   the  attitude,    if   not   by   the    formal    words,   of  the   vast 
number  of  those  who  call  themselves  Socialists.     ]t    is  also 
historically    unjustifiable.      The    word,    from    its   earliest    use 
by  Owen,  Leroux,  Reubaud,  etc.,  in  the  thirties  and  forti 
the  last  century,  has  always  stood  for  a  revolution,  along  cer- 
tain well-defined  lines,  in  human  life  generally.     The  attempt 
to   limit   it  to  a  technical  economic  formula     ...     is,  as  T 
have  said,  quite  late.    This  attempt  received  one  of  its  earliest 
expressions  in  English  literature  in  Mr.  Kirkup's  article  in 


1 68  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

the  "Encyclopaedia  Britannica"   [ninth  edition].     .     .     .     His 
example  has  since  been  followed  by  a  large  number  of  expo- 
nents, hostile  and  friendly.    It  is  difficult  to  say  how,  in  the 
view  of  the  history  of  the  word,  the  exponents  in  question 
justified  this  restriction  of  meaning.     The  "materialist  doc- 
trine of  history"  of  Marx  certainly  emphasizes  the  economic 
basis  of  the  social  life  of  man,  as  in  a  sense  the  cause  of  all 
other  manifestations  of  that  life,  even  those  seemingly  most 
remote,  but  in  practice  even  the  strictest  adherents  of  the 
doctrine    in    question    assume    the    results    of   the    economic 
change  as  taking  place  along  definite  lines,  alike  as  regards 
man's  "view  of  the  world,"  as   regards  the  family  relation, 
and  as  regards  political  issues,  and  do  not  hesitate  to  say  so 
as  occasion  arises.     It  is  well  known  that  they  are  in  favor  of 
freer  marriage  relations,  of  the  recognition  by  society  of  the 
conclusions  of  science  as  opposed  to  theological  conceptions, 
and  of  democratic  republicanism  as  against  all  forms  of  mon- 
archical or  oligarchic  rule.     In  these  demands  they  undoubt- 
edly carry  on  the  tradition  of  historical   Socialism,  and  the 
Marxian  party,  using  the  word  in  its  larger  meaning  in  the 
present  day,  is  practically  conterminous  with  the  International 
Socialist  movement.     .     .     .     Most   Marxians  do  admit,  that 
as  above  said,  these  other  changes  are  involved  in  the  eco- 
nomic change  itself,  for  as  such  they  cannot  fail  to  be  re- 
garded as  forming  part  and  parcel  of  the  changed  conditions 
of   the   new   society,    which    is   only    another   way   of   saying 
that   they   must   form  an   essential   element   in  the  complete 
ideal  of  Socialism. 

It  is  not  necessary  to  multiply  examples.  The  pres- 
ent book  is  mainly  an  exposition  and  history  of  Social- 
ism, and  is  not  concerned  with  criticism  except  inci- 
dentally; and  the  references  here  made  and  the  quota- 
tions given  aic  only  presented  because,  according  to  the 
very  highesl  authorities,  this  aspect  of  Socialism  is  a 
fundamental  part  of  the  system.  In  all  fairness  it  must 
be  recorded  that  there  are  thousands  of  good  religious 
men   calling  themselves  Christian   Socialists,  as  well  as 


MARXIAN    SOCIALISM  169 

certain  professors  of  an  elastic  modified  Marxism  (like 
Kirkup  and  Spargo),  who  indignantly  deny  that  repu- 
diation of  Divine  Providence  and  an  upsetting  of  the 
present  marriage  and  family  relations  are  contemplated 
by  or  would  result  from  Socialism,  any  more  than  that 
such   eventualities  can   be   associated   with   Republican- 
ism  or   Democracy,   or   with   Toryism   or  Liberalism — 
although  they  freely  admit  that  Socialists  themselves  are 
largely    responsible    for    the    criticisms    made    in    these 
respects.     They  point  to  the  fact  that  there  are  atheists 
and  immoral  men  connected  with  the  parties  named,  and 
they  ask  whether  atheism  and  immorality  are  therefore 
to  be  considered  as   part  of  their  principles?     Clearly 
not;   but  there  is  a  great  difference  in  the  two  cases. 
Mr.  Ingersoll  was  an  agnostic  and  also  a  Republican; 
does  that  fact  make  the  Republican  Party  an  agnostic 
party  ?    By  no  means.    Marx  and  Engels  were  agnostics 
— atheists,  and  also  Socialists;  does  that  make  the  So- 
cialist  Party  an  agnostic,  an  atheistic  party?     Certainly 
not.     But  the  comparisons  are  incomplete,  and  the  argu- 
ment   of   the    Socialist   apologists    is    inadequate.      Mr. 
Ingersoll  never  claimed  that  agnosticism  had  anything 
to  do  with  Republicanism,  or  that  it  was  an  irresistible 
tendency  and  outcome  of  Republicanism.     But.  on  the 
other  hand,  Marx  and  Engels,  and  most  of  the  other 
great  shining  intellectual  exponents  of  Modern  Social- 
ism,   have    asserted    that    the    philosophy    of    Socialism 
embraces  all  the  relations  and  phases  of  human   life — 
ethical  as  well  as  economic ;  and  that  the  inevitable  ten- 
dency and  outcome  of  the  application  of  the  principles 
of  Socialism   will  be  the  natural  death  or  the  abolition 
of    supernatural    religion    and    the    destruction    of    the 
existing  sexual  and  family  status.     Furthermore,  if  one 


i/O  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

of  the  principal  ''fundamentals"  of  Socialism  (viz.,  the 
materialistic  conception  of  history)  be  sound,  then  no 
declaration  by  any  man  or  any  set  of  men,  no  repu- 
diating resolution  by  a  congress  of  vote-catching  Social- 
ist politicians,  no  legislation  by  a  Socialist  State  even, 
can  alter  the  inevitable  tendency  and  outcome  of  Social- 
ism— for  Socialism  is  a  principle,  not  a  creed  or  scheme! 
The  question  is :  Who  is  to  decide  what  that  tendency 
is  and  what  the  outcome  will  be?  Shall  it  be  the  So- 
cialist politicians  or  the  intellectual  leaders  and  ex- 
pounders of  Socialism  ? 

Wages  and  Distribution  of  Products. 

Assuming  the  establishment  of  the  Co-operative  Com- 
monwealth, the  next  question  to  arise  in  the  mind  of  a 
practical  man  would  naturally  be :  How  are  the  workers 
to  be  remunerated?  On  what  principle  are  they  to 
receive  their  quantum  of  subsistence  and  of  the  conve- 
niences, luxuries,  and  pleasures  of  life? 

Here  again  there  are  wide  differences  among  Social- 
ists.  As  a  practical  matter,  it  is  the  most  important 
in  the  entire  discussion;  and  it  is  perfectly  fair  and 
rca-onable  to  demand  from  Socialists  an  intelligent 
answer,  for  according  to  their  theory  all  the  relations 
of  life  depend  upon  the  "bread  and  butter"  problem. 
Some  Socialists  ignore  the  question;  and  that  is  cer- 
tainly  the  easiesl  way  to  dispose  of  it.  Others,  with 
much  elaboration,  suggesl  method:  of  "equitably"  dis- 
tributing  among  the  workers  the  products  of  their  labor 
and  their  share  of  the  general  possessions  of  the  com- 
munity,  whether  in  goods  or  money;  and  not  a  few  of 
the  e  ingenious  gentlemen  are  sarcastic  as  well  as  dog 
matic  toward  those  who  presume  to  question  the  prac- 


MARXIAN    SOCIALISM  171 

ticabilitv,  the  equity,  or  the  wisdom  of  their  plans. 
(  Ithers  sa)  that  it  is  not  important,  in  any  case,  and 
that  the  question  will  settle  itself  after  the  establishment 
of  Socialism. 

The  general  question  of  remuneration,  or  the  sharing 
of  the  public  property,  has  a  number  of  aspects,  the 
most  prominent  of  them  being : 

(1)  The   assignment    and   apportionment   of   labor. 

(2)  The  distribution  of  the  products.  Is  it  to  be 
according  to  deeds  or  according  to  needs? 

(3)  Is  payment  to  be  in  "kind,"  in  "labor  checks," 
or  in  money? 

(1)  A  number  of  Scientific  Socialist  writers,  while 
repudiating  Bellamy's  Utopianism  in  Looking  Back- 
ward, have  imitated  him  in  setting  forth  plans  showing 
how  easy  it  will  be  to  arrange  all  these  "trivial  details." 
But  the  schemes  for  arranging  matters  are  very  diverse, 
and  sometimes  conflicting.  Some  Socialists  say  that 
every  man  would  have  to  work  at  whatever  he  was 
assigned  to  do;  others  that  he  would  be  allowed  to 
choose  his  occupation,  unless  that  particular  sphere  of 
labor  was  overcrowded ;  some  maintain  that  every  man 
would  have  to  take  his  turn  at  disagreeable  and  labori- 
ous occupations,  while  others  suggest  that  the  best  way 
would  be  to  induce  men  to  do  this  class  of  work  by 
making  their  hours  of  labor  very  short ;  and  still  others 
contend  that  those  who  performed  dangerous  or  un- 
pleasant work  should  be  looked  upon  as  civic  heroes, 
and  should  be  rewarded  with  medals.  As  to  the  lazy, 
most  Socialists  agree  that  these  pests  should  be  made 
to  work,  by  force,  if  nececsary;  while  some  optimists 
profess  to  believe  that  when  the  spirit  of  Socialism  had 


172  WHAT   IS    SOCIALISM? 

thoroughly  permeated  humanity,  all  such  vices  as  lazi- 
ness would  disappear  from  the  face  of  the  earth. 

(2)  This  is  one  of  "the  hardest  nuts  to  crack"  in  the 
entire  range  of  Socialist  problems.  Of  course,  "the 
authorities"  are  all  at  sea  with  respect  to  a  solution. 
Most  of  them  agree  at  the  outset,  that  the  distribution 
must  be  "equitable;"  but  when  details  are  faced  the  dif- 
ficulties begin.  Moreover,  there  is  a  general  policy  pur- 
sued by  Socialist  advocates  of  avoiding  the  difficulties; 
and  some  speakers  and  writers  lightly  dispose  of  the 
question  by  saying  that  it  is  one  of  those  "inconsequen- 
tial things"  which  can  easily  be  settled  when  King 
Demos  sits  upon  his  throne!  The  difficulty  is,  they 
plead,  not  in  distributing  the  product  of  labor,  but  in 
getting  away  from  the  capitalist  the  undue  share  which 
he  now  receives ;  and  it  is  to  be  observed  that  at  Social- 
ist meetings  this  remark  always  brings  out  loud  ap- 
plause. But  some  conscientious  (although  probably  un- 
wise) Socialists  have  bravely  attempted  to  show  how 
the  problem  can  be  satisfactorily  solved ;  and  naturally, 
they  do  not  agree  among  themselves.  Some  insist  that 
a  man  should  be  paid  the  exact  (or  approximately 
exact)  value  of  the  product  of  his  work — they  ignoring 
the  difficulty  of  determining  that  in  "socialized"  indus- 
tries; while  there  are  those  who  claim  that  if  a  man 
worked  the  number  of  hours  allotted  to  him,  he  should 
be  paid  the  standard  wage,  or  receive  his  proportionate 
share  of  the  standard  amount  of  the  product  earned  by 
the  entire  group  or  community,  irrespective  of  his  skill 
or  the  quantity  of  his  individual  product. 

A  reference  to  Chapter  II  ("What  is  Socialism?") 
will  show  that  there  is  ample  authority — including  Marx 


MARXIAN    SOCIALISM  173 

himself — for    the    contention    that    Socialism    implies    a 
bestowal  of  commodities  "according  to  needs." 

(3)  "Up-to-date"  Socialists  have  generally  abandoned 
the  original  Utopian  theory  (advanced  by  Marx  in  his 
miscellaneous  writings)  of  rewarding  labor  on  the  sta- 
tistical system  of  the  "time-basis" — that  is,  of  finding 
out  the  number  of  hours  socially  necessary  to  produce 
the  required  amount  of  commodities,  first  for  a  given 
commodity,  and  then  applying  the  principle  universally, 
the  State  giving  the  workmen  "time  certificates"  ex- 
changeable for  supplies.  Of  course,  such  a  system 
would  preclude  the  possibility  of  rewarding  a  workman 
according  to  his  labor,  as  the  poor  and  slow  workman 
would  receive  the  same  compensation  as  the  skilled  and 
rapid  workman ;  yet,  it  is  a  favorite  claim  of  Socialists 
that  the  workman  should  receive  the  full  product  of  his 
labor.  Kirkup  remarks  (Inquiry  into  Socialism)  that 
this  claim  "is  plausible  in  appearance,  but  when  exam- 
ined is  found  to  be  void  of  meaning,  for  in  the  highly 
organized  industry  of  the  present,  which  is  really  a 
co-operation  of  the  whole  working  society  inheriting 
the  labors  of  the  past,  how  can  we  discriminate  the 
individual  share  of  each  worker?"  Hillquit  takes  the 
view  that  the  "time-certificate"  plan  is  out  of  the  ques- 
tion, he  saying   (Socialism   in  Theory  and  Practice)  : 

Modern  Socialists  recognize  that  the  methods  of  distri- 
bution under  the  new  order  of  things  must  take  for  their 
starting  point  the  present  methods,  /'.  c,  payments  of  varying 
wages  or  salaries  for  services  rendered. 

Here  again  we  run  counter  to  a  deep-rooted  popular  con- 
ception, or  rather  misconception,  of  the  Socialist  program. 
One  of  the  pet  schemes  of  the  early  Socialist  experimenters 


174  WHAT   IS    SOCIALISM? 

was  the  substitution  of  ''labor  certificates"  or  "time  certifi- 
cates" for  money.  .  .  .  Modern  Socialists  have  long  dis- 
carded all  miniature  social  experimentations  and  arbitrary 
social  devices  as  Utopian  and  puerile. 

Some  Socialists  and  most  critics  claim  that  Marx  him- 
self favored  the  labor-time-basis  as  an  equitable  scheme 
for  distributing  the  proceeds  of  labor  under  Socialism ; 
but  this  is  denied  by  other  expounders.  The  latter  con- 
tend that  Marx's  time  theory  only  applies  to  the  pro- 
duction of  private  property  under  the  present  capital- 
istic system.  This  may  be  true  as  to  Capital,  but  Marx 
certainly  favored  the  labor-time-basis  in  other  writings. 
But  there  is  now  a  general  recognition  on  the  part  of 
well-informed  Socialists  that  it  would  be  impracticable 
and  unfair  to  apply  it  to  work  under  the  Co-operative 
Commonwealth.  Indeed,  the  old  original  Communistic 
doctrine  of  "share-and-sharc-alike"  is  again  becoming 
the  accepted  doctrine — providing,  of  course,  that  this 
principle  be  applied  only  to  those  who  work  according 
to  their  ability.  It  is  unfair  to  charge  Modern  Social- 
ists with  an  intention  to  reward  the  lazy  equally  with 
the  industrious — although  coupled  with  that  statement 
should  go  the  observation  that  according  to  Socialists 
the  amount  of  work  required  from  each  man  will  be  so 
small  and  will  require  snch  a  short  time  each  day  [some 
put  it  as  low  as  two  hours!]  that  even  the  chronically 
lazy  ones  will  not  object  to  do  their  apportionment. 
Ilillqnit  says   (Theory  and  Practice)'. 

t 

The  Si"  iali  I  do  not  offer  a  CUl  and  dried  plan  of  wealth 
distribution. 

As  a  proposition  <>f  abstract  justice  and  fairness  there  is 
no  reason  why  anj   di  crimination  at  all  should  be  made  in 


MARXIAN    SOCIALISM  175 

the  distribution  of  the  necessaries  and  material  comforts  of 
life  between  the  members  of  t lie  community.  The  increased 
productivity  of  labor  and  the  consequent  augmentation  of 
wealth  are  due  to  the  concerted  efforts  of  men  in  all  fields 
of  endeavor,  physical  and  mental,  in  Reiterations  past  as  well 
as  present,  and  the  precise  share  of  each  individual  in  the 
general  wealth  of  the  nation  is  altogether  insusceptible  <»f 
11K  asurement. 

.  .  .  To  the  Socialists  the  old  Communistic  motto: 
"From  each  according  to  his  ability,  to  each  according  to  his 
needs,"  generally  appears  as  the  ideal  rule  of  distribution  in 
an  enlightened  human  society,  and  quite  likely  the  time  will 
come  when  that  high  standard  will  he  generally  adopted  by 
civilized  communities.  .  .  .  But  just  and  feasible  as  this 
ideal  method  of  distribution  may  be,  it  is  to-day  nevertheless 
a  mere  ideal,  a  hope  to  be  realized  in  the  more  or  less  distant 
future.  It  is  not  a  part  of  the  present  programme  of  Social- 
i  ;t  movement. 

But  Hillquit  does  not  meet  the  question.  He  does 
not  explain  how  his  particular  school  of  Socialists  pro- 
pose to  decide  as  to  assignment  of  work  and  the  amount 
of  wages  to  be  paid  to  each  man. 

Spargo  is  equally  vague  as  to  the  actual  practice  to 
be  adopted.  He  freely  admits,  however,  "that  approxi- 
mate equality  of  income  is  the  ideal  to  be  ultimately 
aimed  at."  Otherwise — and  here  he  agrees  with  Mrs. 
Besant — class  distinctions  would  inevitably  reappear, 
and  .the  old  struggle  for  equality  would  have  to  be 
fought  over  again.  Rut  Spargo  also  quotes  with  ap- 
proval the  declaration  of  Kautsky  (who  he  says  is  "per- 
haps the  greatest  living  exponent  of  the  theories  of 
Modern  Socialism)  that  "wages,  unequal  and  paid  in 
money,  will  be  the  method  of  remuneration  for  labor  in 
the  Socialist  regime." 


CHAPTER    IX 

SOCIALISM    IN    AMERICA 

The  first  recorded  Socialist  declaration  in  America 
was  in  New  York  in  1829,  during  an  agitation  against 
increased  hours  of  labor,  when  a  mechanic  named 
Thomas  Skidmore  drew  up  an  agrarian  preamble,  which 
has  been  described  as  "transporting  into  economics  the 
Declaration  of  Independence."  In  that  document  it 
was  resolved  that  "the  Creator  has  made  all  equal,"  and 
that  "in  the  first  formation  of  government  no  man  gives 
up  to  others  his  original  right  of  soil  and  becomes  a 
smith,  a  weaver,  a  builder,  or  other  mechanic  or  laborer, 
without  receiving  a  guaranty  that  reasonable  toil  shall 
enable  him  to  live  as  comfortable  as  others."  Part  of 
the  movement  drifted  into  Owenism,  and  what  was  left 
received  its  death-blow  through  the  political  strategy 
of  that  horny-handed  friend  of  Labor — Tammany. 

Backwardism  of  American  Socialism. 

It  cannot  be  said  that  the  history  of  Socialism  in 
America  since  then  has  been  a  very  successful  one, 
whatever  it  may  be  in  the  future ;  in  fact,  as  an  organ- 
ized force,  Scientific  Socialism  is  less  in  evidence  in 
America  than  in  any  other  progressive  country  in  the 
world,  although  Utopianism  has  been  experimented 
with    to    a    greater    extent    here    than    anywhere    else. 

170 


SOCIALISM    IN    AMERICA  177 

Speaking-  generally,  Socialists  have  been  able  to  secure 
bnt  very  few  representatives  in  Municipal  Councils  or 
in  State  Legislatures,  or  to  elect  State  officers — Wis- 
consin being  a  notable  exception.  No  Socialist  has  ever 
been  elected  to  Congress  as  such  until  Victor  Eerger 
was  elected  in  1910,  and,  indeed,  it  is  probably  true  that 
no  Socialist  was  ever  elected  to  Congress  before  last 
year,  even  as  a  member  of  one  of  the  orthodox  parties, 
although  sometimes  "Populists"  have  been  erroneously 
called  Socialists.  This  is  remarkable  in  view  of  the  fact 
that  the  United  States  is  the  greatest  democracy  in  the 
world,  and  possesses  universal  manhood  suffrage.  So- 
cialism is  now  a  political  force  to  be  reckoned  with  in 
the  Parliaments  of  all  European  countries,  and  also  in 
several  of  the  Legislatures  of  the  British  self-governing 
colonies.  In  1909  little  Holland  had  10  Socialist  repre- 
sentatives in  her  Parliament;  Sweden  had  15;  Denmark 
had  24 ;  Italy  had  25 ;  Belgium  had  30 ;  Germany  had  43  ; 
Great  Britain  had  in  1906-1909  55  (Labor-Socialists)  ; 
New  Zealand  had  60;  France  had  75;  Finland  had  80; 
and  Austria  had  87.  And  the  number  is  increasing,  par- 
ticularly in  Germany. 

There  are  a  number  of  reasons  to  account  for  the 
fact  that  Socialism  has  not  made  much  progress  in  the 
United  States,  the  principal  ones  being:  The  general 
spirit  of  strong  individuality  and  self-reliance ;  the  wide- 
spread prosperity  of  all  classes,  as  compared  with  the 
people  of  other  countries ;  the  innate  political  conserva- 
tism of  native  Americans,  which  disinclines  them  to 
take  up  experiments  in  government,  especially  where 
property  rights  and  constitutional  personal  prerogatives 
are  involved ;  the  comparative  absence  of  "class  con- 
sciousness" on  the  part  of  the  working  men   (although 


178  WHAT   IS    SOCIALISM? 

a  change  is  now  manifest  in  this  regard)  ;  the  fact  that 
it  has  been  the  almost  unbroken  rule — until  recently — 
for  organized  workingmen  to  refrain  from  separate 
political  action,  and,  indeed,  from  participation  in  poli- 
tics whatever,  but  to  confine  themselves  to  their  own 
special  trade  matters,  or  at  the  most  only  to  interest 
themselves  in  matters  of  general  social  reform  outside 
the  sphere  of  politics.  Occasionally  Trade  Unions  have 
broken  the  rule  referred  to,  but  in  nearly  every  instance 
it  has  spelt  disaster  to  the  organization.  Within  the 
last  few  years,  however,  there  have  been  indications  of 
a  change  of  attitude  in  this  regard  by  organized  Labor. 
The  Socialists  are  keenly  alive  to  the  situation,  and  they 
expect  that  the  near  future  will  witness  a  great  acces- 
sion to  their  ranks  from  the  Trade  Unionists — and  pos- 
sibly an  actual  official  working  arrangement  between 
the  Unions  and  Socialism. 

Modern  Political  Socialism  made  its  appearance  in 
America  some  years  after  Utopian  Socialism  had  prac- 
tically died  out.  The  movements  were  totally  inde- 
pendent of  each  other,  and  yet,  of  course,  the  public 
attention  which  had  been  developed  by  the  communal 
experiments  led  to  a  trend  of  thought  in  the  direction 
of  Scientific  Socialism.  Unlike  Trade  Unionism,  So- 
cialism was  foreign  in  its  origin.  The  movements  in 
New  York  in  1868-9,  which  were  the  pioneers  of  pres- 
ent-day Socialism  in  America,  were  confined  almost 
exclusively  to  foreigners  by  birth,  Germans  principally, 
with  a  sprinkling  of  other  peoples  of  Continental  origin. 
Nearly  all  of  the  first  real  Socialists  in  America  were 
recently-arrived  immigrants;  but  it  has  been  noted  that 
the  second  generation  are  eldom  Socialists.  This  drift- 
in-  away  from  Socialism  on  the  part  of  "Americanized" 


SOCIALISM    IN    AMERICA  179 

Germans,  for  instance,  is  to  be  observed  in  the  history  of 
the  "Turner"  organization,  which  originally  was  semi- 
Socialist.  Socialism  never  became  important  as  a  pos- 
sible political  or  economic  force  until  its  personnel  in 
organization,  its  methods,  and  its  expression  had  be- 
come relatively  "Americanized,"  although  there  are 
those  who  insist  that  Socialism  proper  can  never  be 
made  adaptable  to  or  be  in  harmony  with  "the  Ameri- 
can spirit." 

Foreign  in  origin  though  it  be  (like  many  other 
things  in  America — some  of  them  most  excellent),  the 
day  has  passed  when  that  fact  can  prevent  a  fair  con- 
sideration of  the  claims  of  Socialism  by  native  Ameri- 
cans ;  and,  indeed,  it  would  be  unwise  and  useless  to 
fail  to  recognize  that  Socialism  has  at  last  secured  a 
hold  on  the  body-politic  of  America,  with  whatever 
errors,  political,  economic  and  ethical,  may  be  attached 
to  it. 

The  "International"  and  American  Socialists. 

As  the  outcome  of  a  movement  started  in  1863,  a 
cum  cut  ion  of  representatives  of  over  sixty  labor  organ- 
izations was  held  at  Baltimore,  Md.,  in  August,  1866, 
and  the  National  Labor  Union  was  formed.  "The  first 
and  grand  desideratum  of  the  hour,  in  order  to  deliver 
the  Labor  of  the  country  from  the  thraldom  of  capital, 
is  the  enactment  of  a  law  whereby  eight  hours  shall  be 
made  to  constitute  a  legal  day's  work,"  was  the  princi- 
pal resolution  adopted  at  this  convention.  An  attempt 
was  made  to  induce  the  organization  to  enter  the  politi- 
cal field,  but  without  success.  Another  effort  was  made 
at  the  next  convention,  in  1867,  and  the  president  advo- 
cated  the    establishment   of   official    relations    with   the 


180  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

European  "International,"  a  society  which  had  for  its 
object  the  uniting  of  the  working  classes  of  all  nations 
in  one  Socialistic  organization.  But  the  National  Labor 
Union  decided  not  to  join  the  "International."  How- 
ever, it  adopted  the  following  resolution : 

Whereas,  The  efforts  of  the  working  classes  in  Europe 
to  acquire  political  power,  to  improve  their  social  conditions, 
and  to  emancipate  themselves  from  the  bondage  under  which 
they  were  and  still  are,  are  gratifying  proof  of  the  progress 
of  justice,  enlightenment,  and  civilization; 

Resolved,  That  the  National  Labor  Convention  hereby  de- 
clares its  sympathies,  and  promises  its  co-operation  to  the 
organized  workingmen  of  Europe  in  their  struggle  against 
political  and  social   injustice. 

At  the  next  convention,  held  in  New  York  in  1868, 
the  Union  became  the  National  Reform  Party,  and 
definitely  committed  itself  to  political  action.  The  presi- 
dent of  this  new  party — the  first  real  national  political 
Labor  party  in  America — was  a  very  able  man,  Wil- 
liam H.  Silvis,  who  was  the  President  of  the  Iron 
Holders'  National  Union,  and  one  of  the  founders  of 
the  National  Labor  Union.  He  announced  that  the 
object  of  the  Labor  Reform  Party,  as  a  workingmen's 
party,  was  to  get  control  of  Congress  and  the  several 
State  Legislatures.  As  showing  the  necessity  of  the 
new  party,  he  declared  that :  "The  working  people  of 
our  nation,  white  and  black,  male  and  female,  are  sink- 
ing to  a  condition  of  serfdom.  Even  now  a  slavery 
exists  in  our  land  worse  than  ever  existed  under  the 
old  slave  system."  At  the  fourth  convention  of  the 
National  Labor  I'nion  (or,  as  it  was  sometimes  called, 
National  Labor  Party,  or  National  Reform  Party),  in 
1869,  it  was  decided  to  send  an  official  representative 


SOCIALISM    IN    AMERICA  181 

to  the  convention  of  the  "International"  to  be  held  at 
Basle,  Switzerland,  in  1870,  and  A.  C.  Cameron  was 
sent  as  delegate.  It  seems  that  Mr.  Cameron  did  not 
participate  in  the  deliberations,  but  contented  himself 
with  giving  grossly  exaggerated  accounts  of  the  strength 
of  the  organization  he  represented,  he  claiming,  among 
other  things,  that  he  was  the  delegate  of  800,000  Ameri- 
can workingmen  who  had  adopted  the  principles  of  the 
"International."  At  the  convention  of  the  National 
Labor  Union  at  Cincinnati,  in  August,  1870,  the  follow- 
ing resolution  was  adopted :  "The  National  Labor 
Union  declares  its  adherence  to  the  principles  of  the 
International  Workingmen's  Association,  and  expects  to 
join  the  said  association  in  a  short  time."  But  it  never 
joined  the  "International;"  on  the  contrary,  it  finally 
became  non-existent  as  a  separate  organization ;  several 
attempts  to  revive  it  were  made,  but  without  success. 
The  first  body  in  America  to  be  directly  affiliated  with 
the  "International"  was  a  German  independent  political- 
labor  organization  called  The  Social  Party  of  New  York 
and  Vicinity.  After  making  one  campaign  (and  it  was 
a  very  insignificant  one)  it  dissolved,  and  from  its  mem- 
bership was  formed  the  General  German  Labor  Asso- 
ciation (Allgemeiner  Deutscher  Arbeiterverein).  The 
principles  of  this  association  were  "strictly  Marxian," 
and  Hillquit  says  that  the  latest  phase  of  the  Socialist 
movement  in  this  country  may  be  said  to  date  from  the 
organization  of  that  society.  In  1869  ^  was  admitted 
to  the  National  Labor  Union,  and  in  the  same  year  it 
also  joined  the  European  "International,"  becoming 
"Section  1  of  New  York."  The  previous  year  a  section 
of  the  "International"  had  been  established  by  German 
Socialists  in  San  Francisco;  in   [869  a  German  section 


182  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

was  formed  at  Chicago;  and  in  1870  a  French  Section 
was  organized  at  New  York. 


The  "International"  Transferred  to  New  York. 

In  the  meantime,  there  was  trouble  in  the  "Interna- 
tional" itself,  growing  out  of  the  struggle  for  control  by 
Marx  and  Bakounin  (the  Russian  Anarchist).  Al- 
though Marx  spoke  of  the  beaten  communards  of  Paris 
as  the  "glorious  vanquished,"  he  was  comparatively  a 
conservative  at  the  period  of  1871 ;  and  at  the  congress 
of  the  "International"  at  The  Hague,  Holland,  in  1872, 
Bakounin  was  "excommunicated"  by  Marx  and  his  fol- 
lowers because  of  his  extreme  views.  But  the  situation 
on  the  Continent  was  not  satisfactory  to  Marx;  the 
United  States  looked  encouraging  as  a  field  of  opera- 
tions just  at  that  time ;  and  so  Marx  transferred  the 
General  Council  of  the  organization  to  New  York.  Its 
career  in  America  was  brief  and  disastrous.  There  had 
been  quarrels  among  the  American  sections  before  the 
General  Council  came  to  New  York ;  the  different  racial 
elements  were  discordant,  and  the  "International"  be- 
came the  "dumping  ground"  for  all  the  fads  and  "crank- 
isms"  of  the  day.  Yet  for  a  time  it  spread ;  the  labor 
troubles  of  1873  were  largely  manipulated  by  the  ex- 
tremists of  the  society ;  and  from  its  activity  in  Chicago 
there  grew  a  new  Socialist  party — the  Labor  Party  of 
Illinois.  In  April,  1874.  the  second  national  convention 
of  the  American  sections  of  the  "International"  was 
held  at  Philadelphia.  The  Socialists  of  the  country 
were  in  a  demoralized  condition,  and  an  organization 
had  been  started  in  New  York  as  a  rival  to  the  Interna- 
tional— the  Social  Democratic  Workingmen's  Party  of 
North    America.      At    the    Philadelphia    convention    the 


SOCIALISM    IN    AMERICA  183 

Federal  Council  of  the  American  sections  was  abolished ; 
its  functions  were  turned  over  to  the  General  Council 
(which  was  international  in  scope),  and  it  was  now 
established  at  New  York.  The  "International"  forbade 
any  member  belonging  to  any  other  party,  but  an- 
nounced that  it  would  not  itself  enter  into  a  campaign 
until  it  could  effect  some  result.  The  convention,  which 
was  held  at  Philadelphia,  Pa.,  on  July  15,  1876,  was  the 
last :  it  was  a  most  melancholy  funeral  of  an  organiza- 
tion which  in  its  hey-day  had  made  "tyrants  tremble" 
by  the  thunders  of  its  resolutions  and  its  proclamations. 
There  were  only  eleven  delegates  present — ten  repre- 
senting the  United  States,  and  one  representing  Ger- 
many. The  General  Council  was  abolished,  and  that 
was  the  end  of  the  once  great  International  Working- 
men's  Association.  Before  adjourning,  the  handful  of 
delegates  adopted  what  was  intended  to  be  an  encour- 
aging manifesto  to  the  working  men  of  the  world,  and 
it  wound  up  with  the  Marxian  injunction :  "Prole- 
tarians of  all  countries,  Unite !" 

The  Socialist  Labor  Party. 

The  origin  of  the  Socialist  Labor  Party — which  is 
still  in  existence,  and  had  a  candidate  for  the  Presi- 
dency of  the  United  States  at  the  election  of  T908 — 
is  owing  to  the  squabbles  which  took  place  among  the 
sections  of  the  "International."  On  the  4th  of  July, 
1874,  the  Social  Democratic  Workingmen's  Party  of 
North  America  was  formed  by  a  number  of  seceding 
members.  In  1875  one  of  its  most  prominent  members 
was  R.  A.  Parsons,  who  later  paid  the  penalty  of  his 
life  for  his  share  in  the  tragedy  of  the  Chicago  "Hay- 
market"  demonstration.     In  July,  1876,  there  was  held 


i«4  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

a  convention  of  representatives  of  a  number  of  Labor- 
Socialist  organizations,  among  them  being  delegates 
from  the  Social  Workingmen's  Association.  The  sev- 
eral organizations  consolidated  under  the  name  of  the 
Workingmen's  Party  of  the  United  States;  and  in  1877, 
at  the  second  convention  of  that  party,  held  at  Newark, 
N.  ].,  the  name  was  changed  to  the  Socialist  Labor 
Party  of  the  United  States. 

For  the  first  time  in  their  history  the  Socialists  of 
America  now  had  a  party  which  had  shown  any  cohe- 
rency; but  already  even  this  party  is  giving  evidence 
that  it  will  soon  be  nothing  but  a  name,  and  will  have 
to  give  up  what  is  now  really  the  ghost  of  an  organiza- 
tion. The  first  great  difficulty  was  in  connection  with 
the  attempt  to  "Americanize"  the  movement,  for  there 
was  a  strong  popular  feeling — which  still  exists,  even 
among  workingmen — that  Socialism  is  alien  to  Ameri- 
can institutions  and  ideas. 

A  number  of  members  of  the  Socialist  Labor  Party 
left  it  and  formed  a  Revolutionary  Club  in  New  York, 
the  principles  of  which  were  a  mixture  of  German 
Social  Democracy  and  Anarchism.  Other  revolution- 
ary clubs  were  formed,  and  a  convention  of  these  clubs 
was  held  at  Chicago,  in  October,  1881.  After  a  period 
of  depression  caused  by  the  defections  of  anarchistically 
inclined  members,  the  Socialist  Labor  Party  had  a  more 
favorable  outlook  ;  following  the  shock  incidental  to  the 
Chicago  drama  there  was  a  revival  of  genuine  Social- 
ism, and  in  [900  the  organization  reached  its  zenith. 
It  had  taken  part  in  several  local  and  state  compaigns, 
and  in  [892  it  for  the  first  time  nominated  candidates 
for  President  and  Vice-] 'resident  of  the  United  States. 
Following  arc  the  Socialist  Labor  Party  candidates  for 


SOCIALISM    IN    AMERICA  185 

President  of  the  United  States  and  the  votes  cast  in  the 
respective  years : 

1892 — Simon   Wing    21,164; 

1896 — Charles   H.    Matchett 36,274; 

1900 — Jos.  H.  Malloney 39.739  > 

1904 — Charles   H.   Corrigan 31,249; 

1908 — August   Gillhaus    32,000. 

The  principal  declaration  in  the  platform  of  the  So- 
cialist Labor  Party  is  as  follows : 

With  the  founders  of  this  republic  we  hold  that  the  true 
theory  of  politics  is  that  the  machinery  of  government  must 
be  owned  and  controlled  by  the  whole  people;  but  in  the 
light  of  our  industrial  development  we  hold,  furthermore, 
that  the  true  theory  of  economics  is  that  the  machinery 
of  production  must  likewise  belong  to  the  people  in  com- 
mon. 

The  Socialist  Labor  Party  calls  upon  "the  wage 
workers  of  the  United  States,  and  upon  all  other  honest 
citizens,''  to  organize  into  "a  class-conscious  body,"  so 
that  an  end  may  be  put  to  the  present  barbarous  class- 
struggle,  "by  the  abolition  of  classes,  the  restoration 
of  the  land,  and  of  all  the  means  of  production,  trans- 
portation, and  distribution  to  the  people  as  a  collective 
body,  and  the  substitution  of  the  Co-operative  Common- 
wealth for  the  present  state  of  planless  production, 
industrial  war,  and  social  disorder." 

There  are  two  special  reasons  why  the  Socialist  Labor 
Party  has  failed  to  secure  a  large  membership:  (1)  It 
has  been  too  rigidly  Marxian,  and  the  profound  revolu- 
tionary philosophy  of  that  system  does  not  appeal  to 
the  native  American  mind  any  more  than  it  does  to  the 
British;  and  (2)  it  has  been  unsympathetic  towards  and 


186  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

often  hostile  to  Trade  Unions;  and  to  the  intensely 
practical  American  workingman  the  advantages  of 
Trade  Unionism  are  far  more  apparent,  direct  and  per- 
sonal, than  are  the  supposititious  benefits  to  be  derived 
from  the  nebulous  theories  of  Socialism. 

The  Socialist  Party. 

The  history  of  the  Socialist  Party  (Social  Demo- 
cratic Party)  is  a  brief  and  simple  one  up  to  the  present 
stage.  It  is  a  development  from  the  American  Railway 
Union,  which  was  formed  in  June,  1893,  principally 
through  the  efforts  of  Eugene  V.  Debs.  After  the 
disastrous  strike  of  the  Pullman  employees  in  1894,  with 
which  the  Railway  Union  was  identified — and  the  fail- 
ure of  which  practically  caused  its  collapse — the  Social 
Democracy  of  America  was  formed  in  1897,  at  the  final 
convention  of  the  Railway  Union.  At  the  first  conven- 
tion of  the  Social  Democracy  of  America,  held  at  Chi- 
cago in  June,  1898,  some  of  the  delegates  indulged  in 
what  seems  to  be  a  mania  in  American  labor-reform 
movements — they  "bolted,"  and  the  ''bolters"  formed  a 
new  organization  with  a  similar  name — the  Social  Demo- 
cratic Party.  It  was  a  party  of  avowed  Socialism,  for 
by  this  lime  Eugene  V.  Debs  had  become  a  follower  of 
Marx,  and  lie  pot  (o  be  the  leader  of  the  new  Social 
Democratic  Party,  as  he  bad  been  of  the  Railway  Union. 
Tn  July,  1901,  an  amalgamation  was  effected  between 
the  Social  Democratic  Party  and  another  organization, 
fir  1  called  the  Rochester  (N.  Y.)  Socialist  Labor  Party, 
and  afterward  also  claiming  the  name  of  the  Social 
Democratic  Party;  and  the  united  organization  of  these 
two  rival  bodies  (both  at  that  time  bearing  the  name 
of  the  Social  Democratic  Party)  was  given  the  name  of 


SOCIALISM    IN    AMERICA  187 

the  Socialist  Party.  It  is  this  party  whose  candidate 
.Mr.  Debs  has  been  several  times  for  the  Presidency  of 
the  United  States ;  and  it  is  the  only  organization  pro- 
fessing international,  "class-conscious,"  Scientific  So- 
cialism which  has  firmly  established  itself  and  developed 
any  considerable  strength  in  America.  It  has  a  large 
and  growing  number  of  newspapers,  weekly,  semi- 
monthly, and  monthly  journals  and  reviews.  While 
professedly  Marxian,  it  is  becoming  increasingly  Oppor- 
tunist or  Constructive. 

The  first  plank  of  the  platform  of  the  Socialist  Party 
is  as  follows : 

The  Socialist  party  of  America,  in  national  convention 
assembled,  reaffirms  its  adherence  to  the  principles  of  inter- 
national Socialism,  and  declares  its  aim  to  be  the  organiza- 
tion of  the  working  class  and  those  in  sympathy  with  it 
into  a  political  party,  with  the  object  of  conquering  the  pow- 
ers of  government  and  using  them  for  the  purpose  of  trans- 
forming the  present  system  of  private  ownership  of  the 
means  of  production  and  distribution  into  collective  owner- 
ship by  the  entire  people. 

But  while  aiming  at  the  ultimate  collective  owner- 
ship of  the  means  of  production  and  distribution,  the 
Socialist  Party  supports  all  active  efforts  of  the  working 
class  to  better  its  condition  and  to  elect  Socialists  to 
political  offices,  in  order  to  facilitate  the  attainment  of 
this  end.     As  such  means  it  advocates : 

I.  The  public  ownership  of  all  means  of  transportation  and 
communication  and  all  other  public  utilities,  as  well  as  of 
all  industries,  controlled  by  monopolies,  trusts,  and  com- 
bines. No  part  of  the  revenue  of  such  industries  to  be  ap- 
plied to  the  reduction  of  taxes  on  property  of  the  capitalist 
class,  but  to  be  applied  wholly  to  the  increase  of  wages  and 
shortening  of  the  hours  of  labor  of  the  employees,  to   the 


188  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

improvement    of   the    service    and    diminishing  the   rates   to 
the  consumers. 

2.  The  progressive  reduction  of  the  hours  of  labor  and 
the  increase  of  wages  in  order  to  decrease  the  share  of 
the  capitalist  and  increase  the  share  of  the  worker  in  the 
product  of  labor. 

3.  State  or  national  insurance  of  working  people  in  case 
of  accidents,  lack  of  employment,  sickness,  and  want  in  old 
age;  the  funds  for  this  purpose  to  be  collected  from  the 
revenue  of  the  capitalist  class,  and  to  be  administered  under 
the  control  of  the  working  class. 

4.  The  inauguration  of  a  system  of  public  industries,  pub- 
lic credit  to  be  used  for  that  purpose  in  order  that  the 
workers  be  secured  the  full  product  of  their  labor. 

5.  The  education  of  all,  state  and  municipal  aid  for  books, 
clothing  and  food. 

6.  Equal   civil  and  political  rights  for  men  and   women. 

7.  The  initiative  and  referendum,  proportional  represen- 
tation, and  the  right  of  recall  of  representatives  by  their 
constituents. 

But  in  advocating  these  measures  as  steps  in  the  overthrow 
of  capitalism  and  the  establishment  of  the  co-operative  com- 
monwealth, we  warn  the  working  class  against  the  so-called 
public-ownership  movements  as  an  attempt  of  the  capitalist 
class  to  secure  governmental  control  of  public  utilities  for 
the  purpose  of  obtaining  greater  security  in  the  exploitation 
of  other  industries  and  not  for  the  amelioration  of  the  con- 
ditions of  the  working  cla 

Beginners  in  the  study  of  Socialism  are  often  per- 
plexed over  the  fact  that  while  its  adherents  rail  at  the 
capitalists  who  own  trusts  and  trade  combinations,  yet 
they  are  tolerant  and  often  commendatory  of  the  col- 
lective principle  and  competition-destroying  effect  of  the 
trusts  and  combinations  themselves.  The  Socialist  Party 
in  their  general  statement  of  principles  at  the  conven- 
tion of  k/)S  give  the  explanation  of  this  apparent 
anomaly,  they  saying:     "The  basis  for  such  transforma- 


SOCIALISM    IN    AMERICA  189 

tion  (from  private  to  collective  ownership)  is  rapidly 
developing  within  present  capitalist  society.  The  fac- 
tory system,  with  its  complex  machinery  and  minute 
division  of  labor,  is  rapidly  destroying  all  vestiges  of 
individual  production  in  manufacture.  Modern  produc- 
tion is  already  very  largely  a  collective  and  social  pro- 
cess. The  great  trusts  and  monopolies  which  have 
sprung  up  in  recent  years  have  organized  the  work  and 
management  of  the  principal  industries  on  a  national 
scale,  and  have  fitted  them  for  collective  use  and  opera- 
tion." 

Young  as  is  the  Socialist  movement  in  America,  prop- 
erly speaking,  it  has  already  encountered  a  form  of 
opposition  which  the  Socialists  of  Europe — and  par- 
ticularly of  England  within  the  last  few  years — have 
found  to  be  the  most  powerful  which  they  have  so  far 
encountered  since  Marx  and  Engels  issued  their  Com- 
munist Manifesto  in  1848.  Reference  is  here  made  to 
the  charge  that  Marxist  Socialism  is  atheistic  and  im- 
moral. The  Socialist  Party  of  America  recognize  the 
seriousness  of  this  charge,  for  in  their  declaration  of 
1908  they  say:  "The  Socialist  Party  is  primarily  an 
economic  and  political  movement.  It  is  not  concerned 
with  matters  of  religious  belief."  [It  is  to  be  observed, 
however,  that  the  declaration  is  qualified  by  the  word 
"primarily."] 

The  convention  extended  the  former  "general  de- 
mands," by  including  the  employment  by  the  govern- 
ment of  the  workless  in  building  schools;  reforestration 
and  reclamation  of  cut-over  and  waste  lands ;  the  build- 
ing of  canals,  etc. ;  the  loaning  of  public  money  to 
municipalities,  without  interest,  for  public  works;  the 
contribution  of  public  funds  to  Trade  Unions ;  the  exten- 


190  WHAT   IS    SOCIALISM? 

sion  of  the  public  domain  to  include  mines,  quarries,  oil 
wells,  forests,  and  water-powers;  and  demanded  that  the 
occupancy  and  use  of  land  should  be  the  sole  title  to 
possession.  Its  political  demands  included  the  exten- 
sion of  inheritance  taxes;  a  graduated  income  tax;  and 
"the  abolition  of  the  power  usurped  by  the  Supreme 
Court  of  the  United  States  to  pass  upon  the  constitu- 
tionality of  legislation  enacted  by  Congress.  National 
laws  to  be  repealed  or  abrogated  only  by  act  of  Con- 
gress or  by  a  referendumof  the  whole  people."  De- 
mands were  also  made  that  the  constitution  of  the 
United  States  should  be  made  amendable  by  majority 
vote;  that  all  judges  be  elected  by  the  people  for  short 
terms ;  that  the  power  to  issue  injunctions  be  curbed  by 
immediate  legislation ;  and  for  the  free  administration 
of  justice. 

The  Socialist  Party  has  regular  state  organizations  in 
every  state  of  the  Union  with  the  exception  of  a  few 
of  the  Southern  States.  Ever  since  1899  it  nas  elected  a 
small  number  of  state  and  local  officials,  particularly  in 
the  Middle  and  far-Western  states. 

As  it  accepts  the  platform  and  principles  of  the  Inter- 
national Socialist  movement,  the  American  Socialist 
Party  is  represented  at  the  International  Socialist  Bu- 
reau, at  Brussels  (the  executive  department  of  the  suc- 
or  of  the  old  "International"),  and  takes  part  in  the 
congrt     <  3  of  the  International  Party  of  Socialism. 

hollowing  are  the  number  of  votes  cast  in  the  Presi- 
dential elections  for  Mr.  Debs,  as  the  candidate  of  the 
Social  Party  : 

1  woo    87,814; 

[904   402,283; 

1908   482,000. 


SOCIALISM    IN    AMERICA  191 

It  should  be  remembered  that  there  are  two  Socialist 
Parties  in  the  United  States,  and  that  the  other,  the 
Socialist  Labor  Party,  cast  32,000  votes  for  its  candidate 
for  the  Presidency  last  year,  if  this  number  be  added 
to  the  votes  cast  for  Mr.  Debs,  it  shows  that  in  1908 
there  were  514,000  Socialist  voters  in  the  United  States 
— about  one  Socialist  in  every  twenty-eight  of  the  entire 
number  of  voters  in  the  country. 

In  the  various  State  and  local  elections  held  in  1910 
the  Socialist  vote  was  largely  increased ;  in  some  States 
it  was  doubled.  The  aggregate  of  the  votes  for  Con- 
gressmen was  720,000. 

In  the  local  elections  of  November,  191 1,  throughout 
the  country,  there  were  large  Socialist  gains.  In  Ohio 
nine  small  towns  elected  Socialist  Mayors,  and  in  Colum- 
bus, the  State  capital,  four  Socialist  members  of  Coun- 
cil were  elected.  It  is  difficult  to  say  to  what  extent 
these  victories  were  owing  to  the  spread  of  real  Social- 
ist sentiment  among  the  voters.  In  nearly  every  instance 
there  were  special  reasons  for  the  consolidation  of  the 
votes  of  the  members  of  Labor  organizations ;  then  the 
working  people  of  the  entire  country  had  allowed  Social- 
ist orators  to  inflame  them  by  representing  that  the  capi- 
talists and  the  Government  were  persecuting  the  Mc- 
Namara  brothers,  then  under  trial  for  dynamiting  the 
office  of  the  Times,  of  Los  Angeles,  Cal. ;  and,  further- 
more, there  was  a  general  spirit  of  discontent  with 
existing  economic  and  political  conditions.  A  Socialist 
leader  of  Columbus  (O.)  frankly  gives  it  as  his  opinion 
that  of  all  the  votes  cast  for  Socialist  candidates,  only 
about  one-third  represented  actual  Socialist  sentiment. 


192  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

Anarchism  in  America. 

There  have  been  several  outbreaks  of  violence  in 
America  in  connection  with  labor  disputes  which  are 
generally  described  as  "anarchistic"  or  "socialistic." 
The  most  dreadful  of  these  deplorable  incidents  is  asso- 
ciated with  the  "Haymarket"  of  Chicago.  Another,  of 
evil  notoriety,  is  connected  with  a  strike  of  miners  in 
Colorado. 

Frankness  compels  the  admission  that  violence  is  a 
more  frequent  accompaniment  of  Labor  disputes  in 
America  than  in  Great  Britain  or  Germany.  But  at 
the  outset  it  should  also  be  said  that  the  real,  representa- 
tive leaders  of  organized  Labor  in  America  are  as  much 
opposed  to  violence  and  unlawful  methods  as  are  the 
present-day  Labor  leaders  of  Great  Britain. 

While  the  American  and  the  British  love  of  law  and 
order  are  the  same  fundamentally,  there  is  in  America, 
as  compared  with  England,  a  more  "rough-and-ready" 
method  of  action,  not  only  on  the  part  of  the  men  on 
strike  and  of  the  employers  also,  but  by  the  State 
authorities  themselves,  when — as  often  happens — they 
are  called  upon  to  suppress  disorder.  In  America  the 
police  and  the  military  sometimes  use  force  in  a  man- 
ner and  to  a  degree  that  would  not  be  tolerated  in  Eng- 
land ;  and  in  that  country  there  is  no  such  body  as 
"I'inkerton  men."  In  the  "good  old  days"  there  used 
to  be  a  great  deal  of  violence  in  trade  disputes  in  Eng- 
land, and  even  to-day  the  British  workingman  out  on  a 
Strike  is  not  a  "lamb"  by  any  means;  and  the  British 
Trade  Unionist  or  Socialist  is  not  conspicuous  for  his 
tolerance  or  consideration  toward  those  who  are  not  of 
his  way  of  thinking — this  fact  being  illustrated  by  out- 
rages by   Welsh  miners  in    1909  and    1910,  and  by  the 


SOCIALISM    IN    AMERICA  193 

sailors  and  dock  laborers  at  the  great  shipping  ports  of 
England  and  Scotland  in  191 1. 

Anarchism  in  the  United  States  must  he  taken  first 
as  generally  of  alien  conception,  as  only  a  passing  phase 
of  social  conditions — as  an  incident  of  the  moment,  and 
largely  of  local  environment,  and  also  of  individual 
rashness  and  folly.  Properly  speaking,  it  cannot  be 
considered  to  be  a  development  of  genuine  Socialism, 
much  less  of  genuine  Trade  Unionism.  Anarchism  as  a 
system,  even  philosophical  Anarchism,  may  be  said  to 
be  non-existent  in  America,  as  it  is  also  not  to  be  found 
in  Great  Britain.  There  are  a  few — and  a  very  few — 
unpractical,  dreamy,  philosophical  "arm-chair"  Anarch- 
ists in  America;  but  they  are  perfectly  harmless.  And 
there  are  also  a  few  unhappy  men,  of  both  native  and 
foreign  birth,  who  probably  are  only  restrained  by  the 
fear  of  the  gallows  from  throwing  an  occasional  bomb 
at  some  unpopular  capitalist.  But  Anarchism  as  an 
organized,  permanent  system  is  practically  a  political 
and  social  impossibility  in  America. 

Chicago  and  Cincinnati  have  the  unenviable  notoriety 
of  being  the  recruiting  grounds  of  the  first  active  revo- 
lutionary anarchistic  organization  in  America,  outside 
of  several  clubs  in  New  York,  which  latter  appear  to 
have  been  little  more  than  societies  for  indulgence  in 
beery  symposiums.  But  the  Anarchists  of  Chicago  and 
Cincinnati  evidently  thought  that  they  meant  business, 
for  they  organized  several  military  companies  under  the 
name  of  Educational  and  Defensive  Societies  (Lehr 
and  Wehr  Vereine).  The  national  committee  of  the  So- 
cialist Labor  Party  repudiated  these  mischievous  "side- 
shows" of  their  organization,  and  requested  all  genuine 
Socialists  to  withdraw  from  them.     In  November,  1880, 


194  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

some  seceders  from  the  Socialist  Labor  Party  formed 
Revolutionary  Clubs  at  New  York  and  a  number  of 
the  other  large  cities  of  the  country.  One  was  formed 
at  Chicago,  and  at  its  head  were  Paul  Grottkau,  August 
Spies  and  Albert  R.  Parsons.  In  October,  1881,  these 
Revolutionary  Clubs  reorganized  themselves  into  the 
Revolutionary  Socialist  Party.  In  October,  1883,  a  joint 
convention  of  Anarchists  and  revolutionist  Socialists 
was  held  at  Pittsburg,  and  the  International  Working 
People's  Association  was  formed.  A  fiery  "proclama- 
tion" was  issued,  its  authors  probably  being  conceited 
enough  to  imagine  that  the  document  would  become  as 
historic  as  the  Communist  Manifesto  of  Marx  and  En- 
gels.  This  "proclamation"  stated  the  object  of  the 
movement  to  be :  "The  destruction  of  the  existing  class 
government  by  all  means,  i.  e.,  by  energetic,  implacable, 
revolutionary,  and  international  action,"  and  the  estab- 
lishment of  a  system  of  industry  based  on  "the  free 
exchange  of  equivalent  products  between  the  producing 
organizations  themselves  and  without  the  intervention 
of  middlemen  and  profit-making." 

Unfortunately  for  law  and  order  and  the  good  name 
of  Trade  Unionism  and  of  Socialism  proper,  there  had 
just  come  over  from  the  old  world  the  Prince  of  An- 
archy— the  incarnation  of  revolution  against  authority 
— John  Most,  who  had  recently  finished  a  term  in  an 
English  prison  for  lauding  the  assassins  of  the  Russian 
Emperor  and  inciting  others  to  follow  their  example; 
and  he  stirred  up  the  mess  that  was  brewing  in  the 
witches'  cauldron  at  Chicago. 

May  1.  [886,  was  the  day  fixed  for  a  general  strike 
throughout  the  United  States  and  Canada  to  gain  the 
eight-hour  day,  this  step  having  been  determined  upon 


SOCIALISM    IN    AMERICA  195 

two  years  previously  by  the  Federation  of  Trades  and 
Labor  Unions.  During  these  two  years  the  spirit  of 
unrest  and  discontent  had  been  growing  among  the 
working  people,  and  it  was  worse  in  Chicago  than  any- 
where else.  In  that  city  was  a  section  of  the  American 
International  (not,  however,  connected  with  the  old 
European  "International"),  and  it  had  become  an  an- 
archistic organization.  The  "Information  Bureau"  of 
the  Anarchists  was  at  Chicago,  and  there  were  three 
anarchistic  papers  published  in  that  city — two  German, 
with  Justus  Schwab  and  August  Spies  as  principal 
writers,  and  A.  Fischer  as  foreman ;  and  one  in  the  Eng- 
lish language,  with  Albert  R.  Parsons  as  the  editor. 
It  is  difficult  after  this  lapse  of  time  subsequent  to  the 
affair  to  understand  how  sane  men  could  have  acted  as 
the  Chicago  Anarchists  did;  and  some  responsibility 
must-  rest  upon  organized  Labor  and  its  so-called  leaders. 
The  working  people  got  stirred  up  to  a  great  pitch 
of  excitement;  meetings  were  held,  and  the  most  incen- 
diary language  was  used;  and  the  Anarchist  papers 
raved  as  if  only  civil  war  could  prevent  the  rights  of 
the  wage  earners  from  being  taken  away.  At  one  meet- 
ing, held  near  a  factory,  violence  was  manifested  against 
some  non-union  workers.  The  police  were  sent  for  and 
came  in  large  numbers,  and  volleys  of  stones  greeted 
them,  they  replying  with  their  revolvers.  Some  pistol 
shots  were  returned  by  the  mob.  At  this  the  police 
fired  a  fusillade,  and  four  of  the  crowd  were  killed  and 
a  great  many  were  wounded.  Then  the  Anarchists 
issued  a  circular  headed  "Revenge!"  The  workingmen 
were  urged  to  arm  themselves,  and  on  the  next  evening 
a  meeting  was  held  for  the  purpose  of  "branding  the 
murder  of  our  fellow-workers."     The  meeting  proper 


196  WHAT   IS    SOCIALISM? 

seems  to  have  been  over,  but  at  a  later  gathering,  which 
was  being  addressed  by  an  Anarchist,  a  large  force  of 
police  arrived,  and  the  commanding  officer  ordered  the 
crowd  to  disperse.  A  dynamite  bomb  was  thrown  from 
an  alley  between  two  companies  of  police,  but,  strange 
to  say,  only  one  was  killed,  although  a  number  were 
injured.  Then  a  regular  pitched  battle  occurred  be- 
tween the  crowd  and  the  police,  and  half  a  dozen  police- 
men and  four  workingmen  were  killed,  and  a  great 
many  on  both  sides  were  wounded.  It  has  never  been 
definitely  settled  who  threw  the  bomb,  but  a  number 
of  the  agitators  were  indicted,  they  being  charged  with 
the  murder  of  the  policeman  who  was  killed  by  the 
bomb.  August  Spies,  Samuel  Fielden,  Michael  Schwab, 
Albert  R.  Parsons,  Adolph  Fischer,  George  Engel,  and 
Louis  Lingg  were  found  guilty  of  murder,  and  the  pen- 
alty was  fixed  at  death.  On  an  appeal  to  the  Governor 
of  Illinois  for  clemency,  the  sentences  of  Schwab  and 
Fielden  were  commuted  to  life  imprisonment.  Lingg 
committed  suicide  in  his  cell  by  exploding  a  cartridge 
in  his  mouth.  Spies,  Parsons,  Fischer,  and  Engel  were 
hanged  on  November  nth,  1887.  These  men  had  un- 
doubtedly worked  themselves  up  to  such  a  condition  of 
mind  that  they  really  believed  they  were  Labor's  mar- 
tyrs; and  it  is  said  that  they  all  died  bravely.  As  the 
noose  was  placed  around  the  neck  of  Spies,  he  said: 
"The  time  will  come  when  our  silence  in  the  grave  will 
be  more  eloquent  than  our  speeches!"  The  last  words 
of  Parsons  were:  "Let  the  voice  of  the  people  be 
heard!"  "This  is  the  happiest  moment  of  my  life!" 
exclaimed   Fischer,   as  he  ascended   the   scaffold.     Six! 

years  afterwards,  John   P.  Altgeld,  who  had  been  elected 
Governor  of  the  State,  granted  an  absolute  pardon  to 


§<  OALISM    IN    AMERICA  197 

Samuel  Fielden,  Oscar  Neebe,  and  Michael  Schwab, 
and  in  doing  so  he  took  occasion  to  denounce  what  he 
termed  the  unfair  and  partial  methods  of  the  trial  judge. 
The  latter  (Judge  Gary)  defended  the  verdict  in  a  long 
article  in  the  Century  Magazine.  In  this  article  the 
judge  pointed  out  that  the  defendants  were  found  guilty 
and  sentenced  not  because  they  were  Anarchists,  but 
because  they  were  parties  to  murder.  "The  conviction 
proceeded  upon  the  ground  that  they  had  generally,  by 
speech  and  print,  advised  large  classes  to  commit  mur- 
der; and  had  left  the  commission,  the  time  and  place, 
and  when  to  the  individual  will  and  whim  or  caprice. 
.  .  .  They  incited,  advised,  encouraged  the  throwing 
of  the  bomb  that  killed  the  policeman  not  by  addressing 
the  bomb-thrower  specially,  .  .  .  but  by  general  ad- 
dresses to  readers  and  hearers." 

The  Moyer-Haywood  Murder  Case. 

A  score  of  years  after  the  awful  affair  at  Chicago, 
there  were  a  most  sensational  series  of  outrages  in  Colo- 
rado and  elsewhere  in  the  Western  mining  States,  result- 
ing in  the  trial  of  three  Labor  leaders  for  murder.  In 
1899  the  Legislature  of  Colorado  had  passed  an  eight- 
hour  law  for  the  miners  of  that  state,  but  the  Supreme 
Court  declared  it  unconstitutional.  In  1902,  however, 
the  miners  were  powerful  enough  to  secure  the  passage 
by  the  people  of  a  constitutional  amendment  making  it 
mandatory  on  the  Legislature  to  pass  an  eight-hour 
law.  But  the  succeeding  Legislature  failed  to  do  so. 
Thereupon  the  miners  of  Colorado  struck  for  eight 
hours  and  for  the  settlement  of  some  grievances.  There 
undoubtedly  was  violence  upon  the  part  of  individual 
miners,    even   though    the    Union   were   not    directly    or 


198  WHAT   IS    SOCIALISM? 

officially  implicated.  The  mine-owners,  on  their  part, 
were  not  over-gentle  in  their  methods,  and  they  evicted 
a  number  of  the  miners  from  their  cottages.  The  state 
troops  were  called  out,  and  the  strike  was  "broken." 

On  December  30th,  1905,  Frank  Steunenberg,  the 
former  Governor  of  Idaho,  an  adjoining  State,  was 
assassinated  by  means  of  an  infernal  machine  placed  at 
the  front  gate  of  his  residence.  Governor  Steunenberg 
had  had  some  unpleasant  experiences  with  the  miners  of 
his  own  State,  and  the  common  supposition  was  that 
his  murder  was  an  act  of  revenge.  Some  weeks  after- 
wards four  leaders  of  the  Western  Federation  of  Miners 
were  arrested,  charged  with  the  murder,  they  being 
Charles  H.  Mover  (the  President  of  the  Federation  of 
Miners),  William  D.  Haywood  (the  Secretary),  and 
two  other  prominent  leaders  named  Pettibone  and  St. 
John.  [Incidentally  it  may  be  noted  that  the  Western 
Federation  of  Miners  has  declared  for  Socialism.]  The 
principal  witness  against  the  accused  was  a  self-con- 
fessed professional  murderer — for  pay !  The  story  he 
told  was  one  of  the  wildest  and  most  extraordinary  ever 
told  in  a  criminal  court.  In  effect  his  evidence  was  that 
the  officials  of  the  Miners'  Union  had  gone  into  the 
business  of  wholesale  murder,  and  had  employed  him 
as  one  of  their  instruments.  The  trial  was  in  many 
respects  the  most  remarkable  ever  held  in  any  civilized 
country.     The  defence  was  first  a  plea  of  innocence,  and 

condly  a  counter-charge  which  in  substance  was  that 
the  mine-owners  of  Colorado  were  a  set  of  blood-thirsty 
wretches,  without  conscience,  who,  in  order  to  get  rid 
of  the  labor-leaders,  had  employed  "agents  provoca- 
teurs."    A  verdict  of  not  guilty  was  rendered. 

One  of  the  most  sensational  incidents  connected  with 


SOCIALISM    IN    AMERICA  199 

the  trial  was  the  denunciation  of  the  defendants,  while 
the  case  was  still  sub  judice,  by  Mr.  Roosevelt,  the 
President  of  the  United  States,  he  denouncing  them  as 
"undesirable  citizens" — a  term  which  at  once  became 
notorious. 

The  McNamara  Outrages. 

The  year  191 1  will  always  be  memorable  in  the  annals 
of  American  organized  Labor  because  of  the  arrest  and 
subsequent  confession  of  three  wretches — two  brothers 
named  McNamara  and  another  man  named  McManigal 
— guilty  of  the  awful  crime  of  blowing  up  buildings  and 
bridges  with  dynamite.  In  the  specific  case  for  which 
the  McNamara  brothers  are  now  in  the  penitentiary, 
twenty-one  lives  were  lost  by  the  explosion  of  the  office 
of  the  Times  newspaper,  at  Los  Angeles,  Cal.  The 
dynamiters  professed  to  be  acting  in  behalf  of  a  trade 
union  organization,  their  purpose  being  to  punish  and 
to  terrorize  the  employers  of  non-union  labor.  At  pres- 
ent writing  it  is  undetermined  to  what  extent  the  Trade 
Unions  were  officially  responsible.  It  is  proper  to  say 
that  after  the  McNamara  brothers  had  confessed,  rep- 
resentative Labor  leaders  and  many  Trade  Unions  bit- 
terly denounced  the  crime  and  the  perpetrators.  But  it 
is  also  proper  to  say  that  many  of  these  same  leaders 
and  organizations  had  vehemently  and  recklessly  pro- 
claimed the  innocence  of  the  murderers,  although  all 
the  evidence  in  sight  was  plainly  to  the  effect  that  there 
was  at  least  grave  reason  to  believe  them  guilty.  This 
criticism  also  applies  to  the  Socialists — who  are  always 
eager  to  applaud  any  outrage  on  person  or  property  so 
long  as  it  affords  an  opportunity  to  denounce  "capital- 
ists" or  "capitalism"  or  the  constituted  authorities.    The 


200  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

plain  truth  is  that  a  number  of  the  principal  Labor  and 
Socialist  leaders  have  incurred  a  fearful  responsibility 
by  stirring  up  class  hatred  and  by  rushing  to  the  de- 
fence of  men  charged  with  outrages,  if  those  charged 
happen  to  belong  to  Labor  or  Socialist  organizations. 
Such  a  reprehensible  attitude  is  the  natural  result — as 
has  been  shown  recently  in  England  as  well  as  in  Amer- 
ica— of  the  "class-conscious''  doctrine  taught  by  Social- 
ists and  now  unfortunately  widely  held  by  Trade  Union- 
ists. And  yet  the  fact  remains  that  the  vast  body  of 
American  Trade  Unionists  are  law-abiding. 

Present  Outlook. 

While  Socialism  in  America  has  not  yet  reached  the 
period  of  manhood  in  experience  and  wisdom,  Trade 
Unionism  in  this  country  is  comparatively  in  its  old 
age  as  to  policy  and  methods.  The  present  relation- 
ship between  Socialism  and  Trade  Unionism  in  America 
is  much  like  that  which  prevailed  in  England  fifteen 
or  twenty  years  ago.  Socialism  in  England  was  noth- 
ing but  a  "cult"  until  it  gobbled  up  Trade  Unionism — 
or  gently  absorbed  it  by  what  Mr.  Hardie  unctuously 
styles  an  "alliance."  Since  then  Socialism  has  become 
the  most  active — and  certainly  the  noisiest — factor  in 
British  politics,  and  proportionately  to  its  numerical 
strength,  the  most  powerful  group  as  represented  in 
Parliament. 

V  the  cast'  stands  at  present,  the  majority  of  Ameri- 
can Trade  Unionists— and  especially  the  most  prominent 
and  trusted  leaders — are  opposed  to  independent  politi- 
cal activity  as  a  general  proposition,  although  there  is 
an  acceptance  of  the  policy  of  aiding  friends  and  punish- 
ing  enemies    by    means    of   the   ballot  ;    and    then    apart 


SOCIALISM    IN    AMERICA  201 

from  this,  it  is  probably  true  that  the  majority  of  Ameri- 
can Trade  Unionists  are  personally  opposed  to  Social- 
ism as  a  doctrine.  But  be  this  as  it  may,  there  can  be 
no  doubt  that  at  present  the  majority  sentiment  of 
American  Trade  Unionists  is  opposed  to  an  alliance 
with  organized  Socialism ;  still,  there  is  a  growing  ten- 
dency to  make  common  cause. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  prevailing  sentiment  among 
American  Socialists  seems  to  be  one  of  opposition  to 
any  alliance  with  the  Trade  Unionists,  or  to  a  reorgan- 
ization into  a  "Labor  Party,"  similar  to  the  rather  com- 
plicated combination  of  that  name  which  has  recently 
been  cutting  such  a  wide  swath  in  British  political  and 
Parliamentary  affairs.  There  has  been  a  discussion  in 
the  International  Socialist  Review  (Chicago)  as  to  the 
orthodoxy  of  the  British  Labor-Socialist  Party,  and  par- 
ticularly as  to  that  of  the  originator  of  the  organization, 
J.  Keir  Hardie,  M.  P.  In  summing  up  the  case  this 
organ  of  American  Marxism  expressed  itself  as  follows, 
and  there  can  be  little  doubt  that  it  speaks  with  author- 
ity on  this  point : 

Whether  the  Labor  Party  of  England  is  a  benefit  to  the 
revolutionary  movement  of  the  world  is  a  question  which 
most  concerns  English  Socialists  and  may  safely  be  left 
to  them.  But  whether  the  Socialist  Parly  of  America  should 
encourage  the  formation  of  a  Labor  Party  here  and  become 
a  part  of  it,  is  a  vital  question  to  us.  To  this  question  the 
Review's  answer  is  an  emphatic  NO.  For  the  American 
Trade  Unions  today  are  as  yet  conservative  rather  than  revo- 
lutionary. They  are  too  much  concerned  with  holding  what 
little  advantages  skilled  laborers  still  have  over  unskilled 
laborers,  to  realize  that  the  important  thing  for  the  working 
class  is  to  gel  control  of  the  machinery  of  production  and 
keep  the  full  value  of  what  they  produce. 


202  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

So  long  as  the  Unions  take  this  position,  an  alliance  with 
them  would  be  a  denial  of  the  revolutionary  aims  of  the 
Socialist  Party.  It  would  be  suicidal.  It  would  show  that 
we,  as  a  party,  deserved  to  die.  It  would  put  us  on  the 
scrap-heap,  to  be  replaced  by  some  new  revolutionary  party, 
made  up  of  men  with  clearer  heads  and  stiffer  backbones. 

However  strong  this  argument  may  be  from  a  Social- 
ist standpoint,  it  seems  clear  from  an  independent  sur- 
vey that  the  Trade  Unionists  hold  the  key  to  the  situa- 
tion— that  the  American  Socialist  Party  will  never  be- 
come a  serious  political  force  until  it  comes  to  some 
understanding  with  organized  Labor.  There  are  influ- 
ences now  at  work,  beyond  the  control  of  the  present 
leaders  of  the  two  movements,  which  will  very  likely 
eventuate  in  a  "coming  together,"  although  the  precise 
form  of  the  coalition  may,  and  probably  will,  differ  from 
that  of  the  British  Labor  Party;  for  Socialism  in  Amer- 
ica, in  order  to  become  a  real,  active  power  in  politics, 
must  abandon  the  pretense  of  "Internationalism,"  and 
must  become  American  in  characteristics  of  structure  as 
an  organization,  as  also  in  peculiarities  of  sentiment  and 
aims. 

A  few  years  ago  Prof.  Werner  Sombart,  a  well- 
known  German  Sociologist,  came  to  America.  On  his 
return  to  Europe  he  published  a  work  entitled  "Why 
there  is  no  Socialism  in  the  LTnited  States,"  and  he 
closed  by  saying: 

All  the  factors  that  have  up  to  this  time  retarded  the  cvolu- 
tion  of  Socialism  in  the  United  States  are  on  the  point 
of  vanishing,  or  of  changing  into  their  contraries,  and,  as  a 

n sequence,  Socialism  will,  in  all  likelihood,  during  the 
next  generation  attain  in  the  Union  its  highest  development. 


CHAPTER    X 

BRITISH    SOCIALISM 

The  Most  Active  Force  in  England. 

The  most  active  political  and  the  most  potent  eco- 
nomic force  in  England  to-day  is  Socialism.  It  has 
passed  the  mere  missionary  and  propaganda  stage :  it 
now  does  things,  and  makes  "the  most  powerful  govern- 
ment in  British  history"  do  things.  It  has  permeated 
all  classes  of  British  society.  There  are  not  only  "So- 
cialists of  the  Chair"  (University  professors  inclined  to 
radical  views),  but  there  are  Socialists  of  the  drawing- 
room,  and  of  the  pulpit ;  there  are  organizations  of  So- 
cialists in  several  departments  of  the  public  service, 
and  also  among  the  school  teachers,  and  the  women, 
and  even  in  the  medical  professions;  and,  most  remark- 
able of  all.  there  are  Socialist  churches  and  Sunday- 
schools  !  And  yet  the  present  wide-sweeping  Socialism 
of  England,  theoretical  as  well  as  practical,  is  distinc- 
tively a  "class  movement,"  avowedly  for  the  special  bene- 
fit of  the  manual  workers — the  "proletariat,"  as  it  is  now 
proper  to  call  them,  according  to  Socialist  nomencla- 
ture. The  organized  workers  of  Great  Britain  (this 
does  not  include  Ireland)  have  become  saturated  with 
a  belief  that  nearly  all  wealth  represents  so  much  plun- 
der, stolen  from  them ;  that  Labor  can  never  secure 
the  rewards  to  which  it  is  entitled  until  all  capital  and 

203 


264  WHAT   IS    SOCIALISM? 

all  productive  enterprises,  and  also  the  land,  are  owned 
by  the  community;  that  it  is  the  duty  of  the  State  to 
provide  work,  with  short  hours  and  big  pay;  and  that 
if  the  State  cannot  find  work  under  these  conditions  it 
is  bound,  at  any  rate,  to  see  that  everybody  be  given 
comfortable  maintenance.  It  is  very  doubtful,  however, 
whether  there  is  any  general  intelligent  appreciation 
among  the  British  proletariat  of  the  actual  philosophy 
of  genuine  Marxian  Socialism. 

Although  the  Socialist  vote  in  Great  Britain  is  not 
nearly  as  large  as  it  is  in  Germany,  yet  it  has  more 
direct  and  indirect  influence  in  legislative  matters  than 
in  the  latter  country.  This  is  true  not  only  of  the  na- 
tional Parliaments  of  the  two  countries,  but  of  munici- 
pal and  other  local  bodies.  The  present  British  Liberal 
Government  has  passed  more  Socialistic  legislation  than 
any  other  Administration  in  British  history  has  done; 
and  for  a  period  of  years,  until  very  recently,  it  seemed 
as  if  the  British  municipalities  had  plunged  headlong 
into  Socialism. 

Characteristics. 

There  is  a  distinctive,  national,  British  Socialism,  not- 
withstanding the  so-called  "ultimate  goal"  of  Interna- 
tional Socialism  (with  which  it  has  recently  formally 
affiliated) — the  Collective  Commonwealth.  The  over- 
whelming majority  of  men  who  call  themselves  Social- 
ists in  Great  Britain  are  Fabian  Opportunists;  and  the 
Marxian,  revolutionary,  philosophical  Socialists  are  a 
comparatively  small  and  unimportant  minority.  The 
two  schools  do  not  get  along  very  harmoniously.  The 
difference  between  the  two  parties — for  in  one  sense  that 
is  what  they  really  are — is  something  like  that  between 


BRITISH    SOCIALISM  205 

the  Socialist  Party  (of  which  Mr.  Debs  is  the  recog- 
nized head)  and  the  Socialist  Labor  Party  (of  which 
Daniel  de  Leon  is  the  head),  in  the  United  States — only 
the  difference  is  more  accentuated  in  Great  Britain. 

The  prevailing  school  of  British  Socialism  takes  all 
it  can  get  from  organized  society — that  is,  from  the  Im- 
perial Parliament  and  the  local  legislative  and  adminis- 
trative authorities.  Its  unwritten  motto  is,  "Half  a  loaf 
is  better  than  no  bread;"  and  it  prefers  "frequent  spoils 
and  victories"  to  the  "all-or-nothing"  programme  of  the 
Marxian  Strict  Constructionists.  But  the  British  So- 
cialists, much  as  they  have  got,  are  as  dissatisfied  as. 
they  were  when  they  first  started  out  on  their  crusade 
against  the  present  "capitalistic  system."  For  the  time 
being  they  are  willing  to  compromise,  but  they  will  not 
accept  any  compromise  as  a  finality ;  and  they  agree, 
in  an  academic  sense,  with  the  Strict  Constructionists, 
that  the  ultimate  goal  is  the  absolute  destruction  of 
not  only  Capitalism  but  of  Individualism — at  least,  of 
Individualism  as  it  is  generally  understood.  The  char- 
acteristic spirit  of  British  Socialism  is  Compromise  and 
Opportunism.  It  differs  from  the  German,  particularly, 
in  that  it  lays  little  stress  on  rigid  and  hard-set  formu- 
las ;  and  in  this  there  is  shown  a  characteristic  differ- 
ence between  the  British  and  the  German  peoples.  The 
hard-and-fast  Marxians  of  this  country,  as  well  as  in 
Germany,  and  in  England  itself,  often  raise  the  question 
as  to  the  orthodoxy  of  British  Socialism ;  but  the  British 
people  do  not  care  much  for  names  so  long  as  they  get 
the  things. 

Karl  Kautsky,  the  editor  of  Die  Neue  Zeitung  (the 
leading  German  Socialist  review),  and  the  successor  of 
Engels  as  the  compiler  of  the  posthumous  writings  of 


206  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

Karl  Marx,  appreciates  what  a  powerful  factor  compro- 
mise is  in  social  and  economic  evolution,  for  he  says 
(Ethics  and  Materialistic  Conception  of  History)  :  "So 
it  seems  to  be  a  general  law  of  social  development,  that 
countries  which  are  pioneers  in  the  economic  develop- 
ment are  tempted  to  put  compromise  in  the  place  of 
radical  solutions." 

Engels,  with  all  his  contempt  for  British  "respecta- 
bility" and  conservatism,  and  his  over-optimism  as  to 
the  early  establishment  of  the  Co-operative  Common- 
wealth in  his  native  Germany,  recognized  that  the  Eng- 
lishman, although  not  a  doctrinaire,  generally  gets  that 
which  he  really  wants  in  legislation.  And,  perhaps  that 
is  because  of  the  very  fact  that  he  is  not  a  doctrinaire, 
but  only  a  practical  Opportunist.  In  his  introduction  to 
Socialism,    Utopian   and  Scientific,   Engels   says: 

.  .  .  But  for  all  that  the  English  working  class  is  mov- 
ing, as  even  Professor  Brentano  has  sorrowfully  had  to 
report  to  his  brother  Katheder-Socialists.  It  moves  like 
all  things  in  England,  with  a  slow  and  measured  step,  with 
hesitation  here,  with  more  or  less  unfruitful,  tentative  at- 
tempts there ;  it  moves  now  and  then  with  an  over-cautious 
mistrust  of  the  name  of  Socialism,  while  it  gradually  absorbs 
the  substance;  and  the  movement  spreads  and  seizes  one 
layer  of  the  workers  after  another.  .  .  .  And  if  the 
pace  of  the  movemenl  is  not  up  to  the  impatience  of  some 
people,  let  them  not  forgel  that  it  is  the  working  class  which 
keeps  alive  the  finest  qualities  of  the  English  character,  and 
that,  if  a  step  in  advance  is  once  gained  in  England,  it  is, 
as  a  rule,  never  lost  afterwards. 

The  above  was  written  in  1892,  and  since  then  there 
has  been  a  marvellous  development  of  Socialism  among 
the  English  workingmen. 


BRITISH    SOCIALISM  207 

English  Socialism  has,  therefore,  been  modified  in 
accordance  with  the  English  temperament,  as  Brougham 
Villiers  says  in  The  Socialist  Movement  in  England. 
It  is  true,  also,  as  that  brilliant  writer  remarks,  that  "the 
belief  that  Socialism  was  essentially  un-English  had 
become  prevalent,  and  continued,  until  the  Labor  suc- 
cesses of  1906." 

Socialism  Essentially  English  in  Origin. 

Yet  Socialism  in  all  its  forms  but  one.  the  Anarch- 
istic, is  really  essentially  English  in  origin — that  is,  it 
is  more  English  than  alien ;  and  even  though  it  is  true 
that  France  contributed  its  genius  to  the  conceptive 
idea  of  Utopian  Christian  and  Scientific  Socialism,  yet 
the  movement  in  England,  along  the  same  lines,  was 
contemporaneous.  More  than  any  other  countries,  Eng- 
land and  France  are  the  birth-places  of  Modern  Social- 
ism ;  nevertheless,  it  has  become  the  custom  in  both 
America  and  England  to  look  upon  Socialism  as  pecu- 
liarly— indeed,  almost  exclusively — a  German  institution. 
and  as  having  come  full-fledged  from  the  brain  of  Karl 
Marx.  But  to  Marx  must  be  given  the  credit  of  mak- 
ing into  a  scientific  formula  the  crude  Collectivism  of 
Owen,  and  of  logically  applying  and  carrying  to  their 
conclusions  the  economic  principles  as  to  Capital  and 
Labor  laid  down  by  Locke,  Adam  Smith,  Ricardo,  Bray. 
Thompson,  Hall,  and  others — all  Britishers.  Marx  was 
five  years  old  when  Ricardo  died,  and  it  is  noteworthy 
that  they  were  both  of  the  House  of  Israel.  "Without 
Ricardo  there  would  have  been  no  Marx,"  declares  the 
learned  Prof.  Flint ;  and  he  goes  on  to  say  :  "The  essen- 
tial content  of  the  Marxian  economics  is  the  Ricardian 
economics.     Marx  received  Ricardo's  exposition  of  eco- 


2o8  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

nomics  as  generally  correct,  narrowed  still  further  what 
was  already  too  narrow  in  it,  exaggerated  what  was 
excessive,  and  made  applications  of  it  which  Ricardo 
had  not  foreseen."  Thomas  Kirkup  (than  whom  there 
is  no  more  reliable  authority)  says  in  his  History  of 
Socialism,  speaking  of  the  Chartist  agitation  of  1837-54: 
"As  regards  the  study  of  Socialism,  the  interest  of  this 
movement  lies  greatly  in  the  fact  that  in  its  organs  the 
doctrine  of  'surplus  value,'  afterwards  elaborated  by 
Marx  as  the  basis  of  his  system,  is  broadly  and  emphat- 
ically enunciated.  While  the  worker  produces  all  the 
wealth,  he  is  obliged  to  content  himself  with  the  meagre 
share  necessary  to  support  his  existence,  and  the  sur- 
plus goes  to  the  capitalist,  who,  with  the  king,  the 
priests,  lords,  esquires,  and  gentlemen,  lives  upon  the 
labor  of  the  working  man."  (Poor  Man's  Guardian. 
1835.)  As  Shakespeare  did  with  history  and  romance, 
so  did  Marx  with  economics — he  gathered  from  all 
sources;  "his  comprehensive  head"  absorbed,  separated, 
analyzed,  humanized,  and  scientifically  systematized  and 
elaborated  the  various  and  often  diverse  doctrines  of 
universal  economics — 

"Till,  like  great  Jove,  the  leader,  figuring  in, 
Attunes  to  order  the  chaotic  din." 

And  now  the  economists  are  tearing  Marxism  to 
pieces;  even  the  Marxians  are  denying  the  "funda- 
mentals !" 

Marx  himself  can  be  cited  as  an  authority  that  the 
economics  he  scientifically  formulated  were  not  German 
in  origin.  In  his  preface  (written  at  London  in  Janu- 
ary,   1873)    to  the   second   edition   of   Capital,  he   says: 


BRITISH    SOCIALISM  209 

"To  the  present  moment  Political  Economy  in  Germany 
is  a  foreign  science.  .  .  .  Thus  the  soil  whence  Po- 
litical Economy  springs  was  wanting.  This  'science' 
had  to  he  imported  from  England  as  a  ready-made 
article ;  its  German  professors  remained  schoolhoys." 
John  Spargo  makes  it  plain  that  the  founder  of  Mod- 
ern Socialism  was  greatly  indebted  to  the  early  English 
Economists  and  Socialists.     In  Socialism  Spargo  says: 

During  the  year  1845,  when  the  history  of  the  economic 
interpretation  of  history  was  absorbing  his  attention,  Marx 
spent  six  weeks  in  England  with  his  friend  Engels,  and  be- 
came acquainted  with  the  work  of  the  Ricardian  Socialists 
already  referred  to.  Engels  had  been  living  in  England  about 
three  years  at  this  time,  and  had  made  an  exhaustive  investi- 
gation of  industrial  conditions  there,  and  became  intimately 
acquainted  with  the  leaders  of  the  Chartist  movement.  His 
fine  library  contained  most  of  the  works  of  contemporary 
writers,  and  it  was  thus  that  Marx  came  to  know  them. 

Foremost  of  this  school  of  Socialists  which  had  arisen, 
quite  naturally,  in  the  land  where  capitalism  flourished  at  its 
best,  were  William  Godwin,  Charles  Hall,  William  Thomp- 
son, John  Gray,  Thomas  Ilodgskin,  and  John  Francis  Bray. 
With  the  exception  of  Hall,  of  whose  privately  printed 
book,  "The  Effects  of  Civilization  on  the  People  of  the  Euro- 
pean States,"  1805,  he  seems  not  to  have  known,  Marx  was 
familiar  with  the  writings  of  all  the  foregoing,  and  his 
obligations  to  some  of  them,  especially  Thompson,  Hodgskin, 
and  Bray,  were  not  slight.  .  .  .  Godwin's  most  important 
work,  "An  Inquiry  Concerning  Political  Justice,"  appeared 
in  1793,  and  contains  the  germ  of  much  that  is  called  Marxian 
Socialism.  In  it  may  be  found  the  broad  lines  of  thought 
which  marks  much  of  our  present-day  Socialist  teaching, 
especially  the  criticism  of  capitalist  society.  .  .  .  Thomp- 
son wrote  several  works  of  a  Socialist  character  .  .  . 
[and]  must  be  regarded  as  one  of  the  greatest  precursors 
of  Marx  in  the  development  of  modern  Socialist  theory. 
Marx  never  claimed  to  have  originated  the  term   ["surplus 


2io  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

value-'].  It  is  to  be  found  in  the  writings  of  earlier  econo- 
mists than  Thompson  even.  .  .  .  Nor  did  Marx  claim  to 
be  the  first  to  distinguish  surplus  value.  That  had  been 
done  very  clearly  by  many  others,  including  Adam  Smith. 
What  is  original  in  Marx  is  the  explanation  of  the  manner 
in  which  surplus  value  is  produced. 

.  .  .  The  studious  years  spent  in  the  reading  room  of 
the  British  Museum  complete  the  anglicization  of  Marx. 
"Capital"  is  essentially  an  English  work,  the  fact  of  its 
having  been  written  in  German,  by  a  German  writer,  being 
merely  incidental.  No  more  distinctively  English  treatise 
on  political  economy  was  ever  written,  not  even  "The  Wealth 
of  Nations."  Even  the  method  and  style  of  the  book  are, 
contrary  to  general  opinion,  much  more  distinctively  English 
than  German.  .  .  .  Marx  belongs  to  the  school  of  Petty, 
Smith,  and  Ricardo,  and  their  work  is  the  background  of 
his.  "Capital"  was  the  child  of  English  industrial  conditions 
and  English  thought,  born  by  chance  upon  German  soil. 

Spargo  goes  at  length  into  this  matter,  not  only 
for  the  purpose  of  demonstrating  that  Marxian  Social- 
ism is  of  English  origin,  but  also  to  rebut  the  charge 
made  by  some  critics  that  Marx  stole  the  ideas  with 
which  his  name  is  associated  from  the  English  Ricard- 
ians  without  acknowledgment.  "As  a  matter  of  fact," 
says  Spargo,  "no  economist  of  note  ever  quoted  his 
authorities,  or  acknowledged  his  indebtedness  to  others. 
more  generously  than  did  Marx." 

John  Ball,  the  First   English  Socialist. 

Brougham  Yilliers,  in  his  Socialist  Movement  in  Eng- 
land, agrees  with  Thorold  Rogers  (the  noted  statistician- 
economist),  thai  wage:  and  the  general  conditions  of 
Labor,  allowing  for  the  price  of  food,  were  better  in 
the  Middle  Ages  than  now;  but  this  is  a  contention  dif- 
ficult to  maintain.     There  was,  in  the  Middle  Ages,  Vil- 


BRITISH    SOCIALISM  211 

liers  claims,  far  more  "organic  Socialism  in  England 
than  during  the  first  three  centuries  of  Protestantism." 
He  says  that  these  Socialist  ideas,  after  being  popular 
throughout  Christendom  for  centuries,  for  a  time  passed 
out  ©f  the  minds  of  men. 

John  Ball  may  be  said  to  have  been  the  first  Eng- 
lish Socialist,  as  the  term  is  understood  now.  Thorold 
Rogers  says  that  Ball  preached  Christian  Socialism ;  but 
he  also  preached  something  very  much  like  the  "class- 
struggle,"  Revolutionary  Socialism  of  Karl  Marx,  with- 
out its  scientific  basis.  One  very  seldom,  now-a-days, 
hears  of  John  Ball,  and  yet  Labor  and  Liberty  owe  him 
a  vast  debt.  John  Ball  was  known  as  "St.  Mary's 
priest,"  and  the  land-owners  called  him  "the  mad  priest 
of  Kent."  He  became  the  eloquent  champion  of  the 
historic  "Peasants'  Revolt"  of  1381.  John  Richard 
Green,  in  his  History  of  the  English  People,  says  that 
"in  the  preaching  of  John  Ball  England  first  listened 
to  the  knell  of  feudalism  and  the  declaration  of  the  rights 
of  man."  Here  is  a  sample  from  his  preaching,  and  it 
sounds  wonderfully  like  an  extract  from  a  speech  by  a 
Modern  Socialist  orator : 

Good  people,  things  will  never  be  well  in  England  so 
long  as  there  he  villeins  [feudal  serfs]  and  gentle  folk. 
By  what  right  are  they  whom  we  call  lords  greater  folk  than 
we?  On  what  grounds  have  they  deserved  it?  Why  do  they 
hold  ns  in  serfage?  If  we  all  came  from  the  same  father 
and  mother,  of  Adam  and  Eve,  how  can  they  say  or  prove 
that  they  are  better  than  we,  if  it  be  not  that  they  make  us 
gain  for  them  by  our  toil  what  they  spend  in  their  pride? 
They  are  clothed  in  velvet,  and  warm  in  their  furs  and  their 
ermines,  while  we  are  covered  with  rags.  They  have  wine, 
spices  and  fine  bread  ;  we  have  only  oat  cake  and  straw  and 
water  to  drink.    They  have  leisure  and  fine  houses ;  we  have 


212  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

pain  and  labor,  the  rain  and  the  wind  in  the  fields.     And 
yet  it  is  of  our  toil  that  these  men  hold  their  estate. 

In  1 348- 1 382  Asia  and  Europe  were  scourged  with 
the  awful  "Black  Death."  It  is  said  to  have  carried 
off  30,000,000  Europeans,  and  of  the  4,000,000  which 
formed  the  population  of  England,  more  than  half  were 
swept  away.  At  that  time  London  had  a  population  of 
120,000,  and  100,000  were  carried  off  by  the  plague. 
The  reduction  in  the  population  had  a  great  deal  to  do 
with  the  abolition  of  serfdom  in  England.  Labor  was 
at  a  high  premium,  the  price  of  food  rose  greatly,  and 
strikes  followed.  Then  came  "The  Peasants'  Revolt" 
of  1381.  The  spirit  of  discontent  was  aggravated  by  a 
change  in  the  "Statutes  of  Labor,"  fixing  the  price  of 
labor  at  what  it  had  been  two  years  before  the  "Black 
Death,"  although  the  price  of  food  had  risen  greatly. 
Still  further  was  the  discontent  increased  by  the  impo- 
sition of  a  poll-tax  to  pay  the  expenses  of  the  war  with 
France,  the  tax  being  the  same  for  the  poor  as  for  the 
rich.  The  revolt  of  the  peasants  was  led  by  Wat  Tyler 
and  Jack  Straw.  Ball  had  incited  the  people  to  revolt, 
and  he  was  imprisoned,  first  in  the  jail  at  Maidstone, 
and  then  in  the  palace  of  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury. 
The  populace  at  Canterbury  were  in  sympathy  with  the 
movement,  and  they  plundered  the  Archbishop's  palace 
and  released  Hall.  Headed  by  Ball  and  Tyler,  the  mob 
(for  that  is  all  it  was)  marched  on  to  London,  occupy- 
ing several  towns  on  the  way.  They  entered  London 
with  the  torch,  and  burned  the  palace  of  the  powerful 
John  of  Gaunt,  and  the  hospital  of  St.  John;  plate  and 
jewelry  were  .smashed  and  destroyed,  but  nothing  was 
stolen.      The   King  parleyed   with   them,   and   by   diplo- 


BRITISH    SOCIALISM  213 

tnatic  methods  induced  the  rebels  to  lay  down  their 
arms  and  to  return  peaceably  to  their  homes.  While 
Tyler  was  holding  converse  with  the  King-,  under  pro- 
tection of  a  "safe  conduct,"  he  was  treacherously  stabbed 
to  death  by  the  Mayor  of  London,  and  that  event 
brought  about  the  collapse  of  the  revolt  of  the  peasants. 
John  Ball  attempted  to  rally  them,  but  failed;  and  he 
was  caught,  hanged,  drawn  and  quartered.  Thus  ended 
what  is  said  to  have  been  the  only  attempt  of  the  peas- 
ants and  artisans  of  England  to  effect  a  revolution  by 
force. 

This  revolt,  although  ending  so  ignominously,  was 
one  of  the  most  historic  events  in  the  whole  history  of 
the  English  people,  both  in  its  causes  and  in  its  perma- 
nent results.  The  times  were  rough  and  bloody;  hence, 
the  methods  of  Ball  and  Tyler  are  in  many  respects 
repugnant  to  our  ideas  of  how  a  popular  agitation  for 
reform  should  be  carried  on.  But  it  would  be  grossly 
unfair,  as  well  as  absurd,  to  judge  these  men  by  present- 
day  ethics.  After  making  due  allowance,  it  cannot  be 
denied  that  John  Ball  had  at  heart  the  true  spirit  of  a 
reformer  and  of  a  lover  of  the  oppressed. 

William  Morris,  "poet,  artist,  and  Socialist" — who, 
until  he  became  a  Socialist,  confesses  that  he  was  only 
"the  idle  singer  of  an  empty  day" — has  immortalized 
"the  mad  priest  of  Kent"  in  a  prose-poem  entitled  "A 
Dream  of  John  Ball." 

The  "Industrial  Revolution"  in  England. 

All  authorities  agree  that  the  event,  or  rather  devel- 
opment, which  brought  about  the  present  Scientific  So- 
cialism, was  what  is  called  the  "Industrial  Revolution;" 
and,  indeed,  Socialists  claim  that  it  was  the  "Industrial 


21. 


WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 


Revolution"  which  has  made  Socialism  necessary.  The 
introduction  of  machinery,  the  establishment  of  the  fac- 
tory system,  and  the  "socialization"  of  labor — that  is, 
the  division  of  labor  and  the  working  in  harmony  of 
different  groups  of  industrial  laborers  or  artisans — was 
the  "Industrial  Revolution."  This  occurred  at  the  close 
of  the  eighteenth  century;  and  as  England  was  then — 
and  for  some  time  afterwards — the  "workshop  of  the 
world,"  it  is  natural  that  its  effects,  and  particularly  its 
bad  features,  should  be  seen  first  and  with  the  greatest 
emphasis  in  that  country. 

The  independent,  individual  workman,  owning  his 
own  means  of  production,  disappeared  with  the  aboli- 
tion of  the  guilds.  There  had  been  gradually  growing 
up  an  industrial  capitalist  class;  and  the  new  system 
swept  manufacturers  into  their  hands.  There  came  a 
new  social  order:  On  the  one  side  Capitalism;  on  the 
other  side  Proletarianism ;  and  as  Morris  and  Bax  put  it 
in  their  joint  work,  "the  workman,  from  being  a  ma- 
chine, was  to  become  the  auxiliary  of  a  machine."  The 
beginning  of  the  "Industrial  Revolution"  was  contem- 
poraneous with  the  invention  of  the  spinning-jenny  by 
Ilargreaves  in  1764;  and  "from  thence  to  the  utilization 
of  steam  as  a  motive  force,  and  thence  again  to  our  own 
davs,  the  stream  of  invention  has  been  continuous." 
And  concurrently  with  this  stream  has  been  an  ever- 
increasing  "socialization"  of  labor — and,  therefore,  ac- 
cording to  the  Socialist  argument,  an  ever-increasing 
tendency  to  and  necessity  for  Revolutionary  Socialism — 
that  is,  for  the  collective  ownership  and  operation  by  the 
Slate,  or  the  community,  of  the  means  of  production, 
di  stribution  and  exchange. 

Accepting   Modern  Socialism  as  of  British  origin,  it 


BRITISH    SOCIALISM  215 

may  be  said  that  its  beginning  was  in  1817,  when  Robert 
Owen  (then  acting  simply  as  a  philanthropist)  appeared 
before  a  committee  of  the  British  House  of  Commons, 
and  presented  a  plan  for  a  Socialistic  community.  Con- 
temporaneously with  this  action  of  Owen,  Saint-Simon 
in  France  had  enunciated  theories  which  are  to  be 
classed  as  Socialistic ;  and  Fourier,  as  an  Utopian,  ante- 
dated both  Owen  and  Saint-Simon ;  but  for  practical 
purposes,  the  beginning  of  Modern  Socialism  may  be 
placed  with  the  event  in  which  Owen  figured  as  above. 
The  condition  of  the  British  working  classes  at  this 
time  was  terrible.  Speaking  of  the  period  of  the  end  of 
the  eighteenth  century,  Villiers  says :  "Divorced,  in  the 
towns  from  all  control  over  the  machinery  at  which 
they  worked,  in  the  country  from  the  soil,  their  guilds 
and  clubs  broken  up,  the  feeble  beginnings  of  Trade 
Unionism  suppressed  by  law,  ill-educated,  over-worked 
and  shamefully  under-paid,  the  working  people  of  Eng- 
land were  practically  outside  of  society  altogether.  .  .  . 
I  know  of  no  modern  literature  where  the  workingman 
counts  for  so  little  in  life,  where  his  inferiority  in  status 
is  taken  so  much  for  granted,  as  that  of  the  eighteenth 
century."  When  land  became  commercially  valuable, 
the  interest  of  the  poor  was  taken  away.  Speaking  of 
the  invention  of  the  steam  engine,  Thomas  Kirkup  calls 
Tames  Watt  "the  greatest  innovator  and  revolutionist 
the  world  has  ever  seen."  But  the  revolution  in  Indus- 
trialism brought  about  by  the  invention  of  the  steam 
engine  did  not  benefit  the  workingman. 

The  "Luddites." 

The    "Industrial    Revolution" — the    "condition    prece- 
dent" of  Modern  Socialism — was  signalized  in  England 


216  WHAT   IS    SOCIALISM? 

by  dreadful  distress  among  the  artisan  class  and  by  out- 
breaks of  popular  fury,  followed  by  stern  action  on  the 
part  of  the  authorities.  "As  we  read  the  accounts  of 
the  distress  which  followed  upon  the  introduction  of  the 
new  mechanical  inventions,"  observes  John  Spargo,  in 
Socialism,  "it  is  impossible  to  regard  with  surprise  or 
with  condemnatory  feelings  the  riots  of  the  misguided 
'Luddites'  who  went  about  destroying  machinery  in 
their  wild  desperation."  These  outbreaks  occurred  in 
1811-1813,  and  again  in  1816.  The  real  name  of  the 
leader  was  Mellor,  but  he  called  himself  "General  Lud," 
this  name  having  been  adopted  by  him  from  the  cir- 
cumstance that  an  imbecile  named  Ned  Lud,  living  in 
a  village  in  Leicestershire,  on  being  tormented  by  some 
boys,  pursued  them  into  a  factory,  and  broke  two  stock- 
ing-frames. Mellor,  or  "General  Lud,"  led  the  artisans 
who  endeavored  to  prevent  the  use  of  power-looms, 
which  had  recently  been  introduced  for  finishing  woolen 
goods,  formerly  done  by  men  called  "croppers,"  who 
were  thrown  out  of  employment.  So  they  organized 
themselves  into  bands,  under  "General  Lud,"  and  de- 
stroyed the  machines.  His  chief  abettors  were  called 
"Lud's  wives,"  and  his  followers  were  called  "Lud- 
dites ;"  and  when  any  machinery  was  broken  it  became 
a  common  saying  that  Lud  did  it.  The  riots  began 
in  the  winter  of  181 1,  in  Nottingham,  and  spread  into 
Yorkshire  and  Lancashire.  Parliament  passed  severe 
laws  against  (lie  "Luddites, "  and  it  is  notable  that  it 
was  in  opposition  to  this  legislation  that  Byron  made 
his  first  speech  in  the  House  of  Lords.  In  1816,  fol- 
lowing the  European  peace,  there  was  fearful  distress; 
the  harvests  were  failures,  and  wheat  rose  to  a  guinea 
($5)  a  bushel.    Seditious  riots  broke  out  in  Nottingham 


BRITISH    SOCIALISM  217 

and  spread  over  almost  the  entire  kingdom ;  and  the 
rioters,  who  were  well  organized,  made  a  specialty  of 
destroying  machinery.  Partly  through  the  return  of 
"good  times,"  and  partly  through  the  repressive  meas- 
ures adopted,  the  unrest  quieted  down.  In  the  suppres- 
sion of  the  "Luddites,"  sixty-four  of  them  were  exe- 
cuted in  181 2,  and  also  a  number  early  in  181 3. 

The  "Chartists." 

Between  1837  an<^  ^54  England  was  disturbed  by 
an  agitation  known  as  "Chartism,"  which  several  times 
threatened  to  reach  the  dimensions  of  a  national  insur- 
section.  It  was  closely  allied  to  Socialism,  although 
some  Socialist  writers  of  the  present  day  try  to  make 
it  plain  that  Chartism  was  exclusively  political  in  origin 
and  objects,  and  should  not  be  considered  as  in  any  way 
connected  with  the  present  philosophical  evolutionary 
Socialism ;  but  certainly  Chartism  must  be  considered  as 
part  of  the  general  movement  in  England  during  the 
past  century  which  has  culminated  in  the  present 
aggressive  and  enthusiastic  Socialist  organizations. 
Thomas  Kirkup  is  not  one  of  these  Socialist  writers 
who  try  to  ignore  or  depreciate  Chartism ;  he  acknowl- 
edges (History  of  Socialism)  that  while  it  was  most 
prominently  a  demand  for  political  reform,  yet  that 
"both  in  its  origin  and  in  its  ultimate  aim  the  movement 
was  more  essentially  economic." 

Kirkup  also  says  that  the  Chartists  broadly  and  em- 
phatically enunciated  the  doctrine  of  "surplus  value," 
afterwards  elaborated  by  Marx  as  the  basis  of  his  sys- 
tem. Engels,  the  great  associate  of  Marx,  sympathized 
with  the  Chartists, — lie  being  in  London  at  the  time  of 
the   agitation — and  he  became   very   friendly   with   the 


218  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

Chartist  leaders,  notably  with  Feargus  O'Connor,  the 
chief  leader,  and  Engels  contributed  to  his  paper,  the 
Northern  Star.  It  was  the  Chartist  movement,  and  the 
revelations  incident  thereto  as  to  the  condition  of  the 
working  classes,  which  induced  the  establishment  of  the 
Christian  Socialist  movement  by  Maurice,  Kingsley,  and 
Ludlow ;  and  after  the  downfall  of  Chartism,  it  was  the 
old  leaders  of  that  agitation  around  whom  centred  for 
many  years  whatever  force  there  was  in  the  Socialist 
cause.  In  fact,  it  was  Chartism  which  nurtured  Social- 
ism when  the  latter  was  in  its  swaddling  clothes. 

Chartism  became  active  in  1838.  The  document  in 
which  the  scheme  of  reform  was  set  out  was  called  the 
"People's  Charter,"  or  "National  Charter;"  hence,  the 
name  "Charterism,"  afterwards  abbreviated  to  "Chart- 
ism." The  origin  of  Chartism  was  the  dissatisfaction  of 
the  working  people  with  the  Reform  Bill  of  1832,  which, 
while  of  benefit  to  the  middle  classes,  was  not  radical 
enough  to  reach  below  that  stratum  of  society.  In  1838 
six  of  the  more  advanced  members  of  the  House  of 
Commons  held  a  conference  with  representatives  of  the 
Workingmen's  Association  of  London,  and  the  draft 
of  a  Rill  to  be  introduced  in  Parliament  was  agreed 
upon,  it  being  called  "The  People's  Charter."  The  prin- 
cipal demands  formulated  in  this  Bill  became  famous 
under  the  name  of  "the  six  points"  of  Chartism,  they 
being:  (i)  annual  parliaments;  (2)  universal  manhood 
suffrage;  (3)  vote  by  ballot;  (4)  abolition  of  the  prop- 
erty qualification  for  membership  in  the  House  of  Com- 
mons;  (5)  payment  of  members  of  Parliament;  (6) 
equal  electoral  districts.  The  sincerity  of  some  of  the 
members  of  Parliament  who  took  part  in  the  organiza- 
tion of  the  movement    lias  been  questioned;   it   is,  how- 


BRITISH    SOCIALISM  219 

ever,  possible  that  the  members  referred  to  may  have 
been  sincere  enough  at  the  commencement,  but  after- 
wards became  frightened  at  the  fierceness  which  soon 
characterized  the  movement.  The  most  influential  of 
the  six  members  of  Parliament  who  helped  to  frame  the 
"Charter"  was  the  eloquent  Irish  agitator,  the  great 
"Liberator,"  Daniel  O'Connell.  It  is  said  that  O'Connell 
handed  the  Charter  to  the  Secretary  of  the  Working- 
men's  Association,  William  Lovett  (a  man  of  excep- 
tional ability  both  as  a  writer  and  as  an  organizer), 
with  these  words:  "There,  Lovett,  is  your  Charter; 
agitate  for  it,  and  never  be  content  with  anything  less." 
Yet  O'Connell  abandoned  the  movement ;  indeed,  he 
became  a  bitter  opponent.  Another  Irishman,  however, 
filled  the  place  of  O'Connell — Feargus  O'Connor.  He 
was  an  educated  and  eloquent  man,  but  not  a  safe  leader. 
O'Connor  was  elected  to  Parliament  from  Cork  in  1832. 
Becoming  estranged  from  O'Connell,  he  devoted  his 
life  to  the  cause  of  the  workingmen  of  England,  and 
he  was  one  of  the  most  fervent  of  their  advocates.  In 
1847  Feargus  O'Connor  was  elected  to  Parliament  from 
Nottingham,  England,  a  working-class  constituency. 
Poor  O'Connor  became  hopelessly  insane  in  1852,  and 
died  three  years  afterwards.  Beatrice  Potter,  the  wife 
of  Sidney  Webb,  Trade  Union  and  Socialist  writer,  is 
severe  on  O'Connor,  in  her  book,  The  Co-operative 
Movement  in  Great  Britain.  She  says  that  the  Chartist 
movement  drifted  from  under  the  leadership  of  honest 
and  able  workmen  and  "passed  into  the  hands  of  an 
Irish  political  quack — Feargus  O'Connor — who  preached 
physical  force  without  daring  to  use  it,  and  precipitated 
his  followers  into  riots  and  conspiracies  for  which  they 
alone   suffered."     Another  gifted   leader  of  the  move- 


220  WHAT   IS   SOCIALISM? 

ment  was  Henry  Vincent,  who  was  called  "the  young 
Demosthenes   of   English   Democracy."     No   other   po- 
litical reform  movement,  before  or  since,  has  ever  taken 
such  a  passionate  hold  upon  the  English  working  classes 
as  Chartism  did;  there  has  never  been  anything  like  it 
in  the  United  Kingdom  with  the  exception  of  the  Fenian 
and  similar  organizations  among  the  Irish.     The  organ- 
ization  of  the  movement   spread   rapidly,   and  monster 
meetings  were  held  in  the  principal  cities.     At  Glasgow, 
for  instance,  there  was  a  meeting  of  200,000  working- 
men,   and   a    report   of   it   reads:      "The   very   heavens 
rang  with   the  lively   strains  of  music  and  the  shouts 
of  the  enthusiastic  multitude.     There  were  forty  bands 
of  music,  and  more  than  200  flags  and  banners  waved 
gracefully  in  the  breeze."     Still  larger  meetings   were 
held  at  Birmingham  and  Manchester,  afterwards;  and 
at   these   and   other    meetings    seditious    language    was 
used,  and  collisions  occurred  with  the  police.    A  favorite 
method  of  impressing  the  country  with  the  strength  of 
the  movement  was  to  present  monster  petitions  to  Par- 
liament.    It  was  discovered,  however,  that  there  was  a 
practice  of  putting  large   numbers   of  fictitious   names 
on  these  petitions,  and  this  discovery  naturally  negatived 
much  of  the  effect   which  they  would  otherwise  have 
had.     In  February,   1839,  a  convention  of  the  Chartists 
was  held,  and  it  then  became  prominent  that  there  were 
two   groups    in    the   movement,   one    favoring    peaceful, 
constitutional   methods,    and   the   other   being   avowedly 
a   "physical-force"   party.     There   were   more  collisions 
with  the  police,  and  several  of  the  leaders  were  arrested 
at   Birmingham,  at  which  the  mob  retaliated  by  setting 
fire  to  property.     On  January   14.   1839,  a  petition  was 
presented   to    Parliament   bearing    1,280,000  names,   but 


BRITISH    SOCIALISM  221 

it  was  rejected  by  a  vote  of  237  to  48,  and  this  action 
of  Parliament  much  embittered  the  Chartists.  Henry 
Vincent  and  a  number  of  other  Chartists  were  impris- 
oned at  Newport,  Monmouthshire.  On  November  4th, 
1839,  there  occurred  at  Newport  what  is  known  as  ''The 
Welsh  Insurrection."  It  had  been  reported  that  the 
authorities  were  treating  Vincent  and  the  other  impris- 
oned Chartists  very  harshly,  and  a  number  of  work  peo- 
ple of  the  district,  with  Chartist  sympathies,  marched 
on  to  the  jail,  probably  with  the  wild  idea  of  releasing 
the  prisoners.  On  the  way  a  company  of  soldiers  was 
encountered ;  the  mob  fired  some  shots  at  them ;  the 
latter  returned  the  fire,  with  the  result  that  ten  of  the 
mob  were  killed  and  a  large  number  wounded.  Some 
of  the  leaders  of  the  mob  were  arrested,  and  tried  and 
condemned  for  high  treason,  and  three  of  them  were 
sentenced  to  death,  but  their  sentences  were  commuted 
and  they  were  transported.  In  1840  there  was  formed 
at  Manchester  the  National  Charter  Association,  which 
soon  became  the  head  of  400  branches.  A  land  scheme 
was  started  by  O'Connor,  but  it  failed  after  a  few 
years;  in  1844  O'Connor  made  himself  prominent  by 
opposing  the  Anti-Corn  Law  League,  and  he  entered 
into  a  public  controversy  with  Cobden  and  Bright. 

In  1848  came  the  culmination  of  the  Chartist  move- 
ment. There  was  terrible  suffering  among  the  working 
people  of  the  Kingdom,  and  they  were  in  a  receptive 
mood  to  absorb  the  spirit  of  revolt  from  their  comrades 
of  the  French  capital.  There  was  a  renewal  of  the 
Chartist  agitation,  accompanied  by  some  disorder.  An 
enormous  demonstration  was  arranged  for  April  10th  at 
Kennington,  London.  It  was  expected  that  there  would 
be  half  a  million  people  present,  and  it  was  planned  to 


222  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

march  to  the  Houses  of  Parliament,  and  present  a  mon- 
ster petition  in  favor  of  the  "six  points"  of  the  Chartist 
programme,  it  being  claimed  that  this  petition  was 
signed  by  5,700,000  people.  Warned  by  the  events  at 
Paris,  the  British  authorities  determined  to  take  no 
chances.  The  situation  was  placed  in  the  hands  of  the 
Duke  of  Wellington;  and  the  measures  he  adopted  were 
not  only  ample  for  any  extreme  contingency,  but  were 
distinguished  by  great  wisdom.  He  so  arranged  his 
troops  that  their  presence  would  not  be  an  inciting  cause 
for  violence,  but  at  the  same  time  they  were  ready  for 
instant  action ;  and  the  military  were  reinforced  by  a 
civilian  contingent  of  special  constables,  variously  num- 
bered at  from  170,000  to  over  200,000.  The  authorities 
permitted  the  meeting  to  be  held  at  Kennington  Com- 
mon, but  forbade  the  contemplated  procession  to  the 
Houses  of  Parliament.  On  the  preceding  evening 
Maurice,  "the  Chartist  parson,"  and  the  joint-founder 
with  Kingsley  of  English  Christian  Socialism,  issued  an 
eloquent  and  impassioned  appeal  to  the  Chartists,  as 
free  and  liberty-loving  Englishmen,  not  to  stain  their 
cause  with  bloodshed  and  violence ;  and  to  the  tre- 
mendous relief  of  everybody  the  affair  passed  off  peace- 
fully. Instead  of  there  being  half  a  million  persons  at 
the  meeting,  there  were  only  one-tenth  that  many ;  and 
the  proposed  procession  to  Parliament  was  abandoned, 
the  Chartist  leaders  deeming  it  dangerous  to  defy  the 
authorities  in  that  regard.  It  took  three  cabs  to  convey 
the  petition  to  Parliament.  Feargus  O'Connor  presented 
it  ;  bul  instead  of  there  being  5.700,000  names  on  it,  as 
claimed  by  O'Connor,  there  were  only  1.975,496,  and  a 
large  number  of  these  were  fictitious,  many  of  the  names 
being   clumsy    forgeries,    such    as    "Victoria    Rex,"    the 


BRITISH    SOCIALISM  223 

"Duke  of  Wellington,"  and  "Sir  Robert  Peel;"  and  a 
large  number  of  the  signatures  were  ridiculous,  such 
as  "Pugnose,"  "Longnose,"  "Flatnose,"  "Punch,"  etc. 
This  fiasco  was  speedily  followed  by  the  collapse  of  the 
Chartist  movement. 

There  has  been  much  discussion  as  to  the  value  of  the 
Chartist  agitation  in  improving  the  condition  of  the 
work  people.  The  general  view — and  probably  the  cor- 
rect one — is,  that  while  there  was  no  definite,  direct 
beneficial  result,  yet  that  indirectly  it  led  to  ameliora- 
tive legislation,  and  caused  thoughtful  men  to  give  more 
earnest  consideration  to  the  just  demands  of  the  work 
people;  and  then  it  was  a  lesson  in  organization  to  the 
work  people  themselves.  The  extreme  discontent  of 
the  wage  earners  was  removed  for  the  time  being  by 
the  inauguration  of  national  prosperity;  and  subse- 
quently several  of  "the  six  points"  were  granted.  The 
vote  by  ballot  was  given  in  1872;  a  reformation  of  the 
electoral  districts  was  made  in  1884-5 !  and  tne  franchise 
has  been  much  extended ;  and  at  the  present  writing 
(January,   1912)   manhood  suffrage  is  in  sight. 

The  "International"  in  England. 

In  March,  1909,  the  Rev.  Bernard  Vaughan,  the 
famous  Jesuit  priest,  delivered  a  lecture  in  London, 
under  the  title,  "Socialism;  Is  It  Liberty  or  Tyranny?" 
His  concluding  sentence  was  as  follows :  "Fellow  coun- 
trymen and  patriots,  build  up  character,  hold  your  own, 
and  send  Socialism  back  to  the  place  whence  first  it 
came — Germany !"  The  eloquent  father  may  be  per- 
fectly at  home  in  disclaiming  on  his  favorite  topic,  "Sins 
of  Society,"  but  evidently  he  is  not  well  posted  in  the 
history  of   Socialism.     As   is   shown   elsewhere   in   this 


224  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

volume,  Socialism  is  a  British  rather  than  a  German 
product. 

There  is  a  sense,  however,  in  which  Socialism  was 
"made  in  Germany."  After  the  conception  of  and  fad- 
ing away  of  Utopian  Socialism  in  England,  and  the 
enunciation  of  the  economic  basis  of  Modern  Socialism 
as  absorbed  and  scientifically  shaped  by  Marx,  there 
was  a  period  of  rest  in  England  in  the  development  of 
Socialism.  "Gradually,"  says  Villiers,  "the  centre  of 
interest  shifted  to  Germany,  in  which  land  the  Socialist 
idea  made,  for  a  long  time,  most  progress,  and  where 
Socialism  was  armed  with  intellectual  and  political 
weapons  fitted  to  the  needs  of  the  age."  Villiers  pro- 
ceeds to  show  that  the  earlier  English  Socialists  "al- 
lowed even  more  than  its  due  importance  to  voluntary 
association,  and  but  little  to  State  action."  This,  how- 
ever, he  argues,  does  not,  even  from  the  standpoint  of 
the  modern  Socialist,  throw  any  doubt  upon  their  ortho- 
doxy, for  "the  aim  of  Socialism  is  to  secure  co-opera- 
tion based  on  the  common  ownership  of  land  and  capi- 
tal, and  the  particular  manner  in  which  this  is  attained, 
by  State  or  voluntary  action,  or  by  both  combined,  is, 
however  important,  a  matter  of  machinery,  not  of  prin- 
ciple." 

Although  the  marked  development  of  and  leadership 
in  Socialism  by  the  Germans  is  of  a  later  period,  yet  the 
influence  of  German  thought  upon  British  and  world- 
wide Socialism  began  to  be  exercised  as  early  as  1836, 
when  some  German  exiles  in  Paris  formed  a  secret  Com- 
munistic society  called  the  "League  of  the  Just."  Owing 
to  their  complicity  in  a  rising  in  Paris  in  1839,  they  fled 
to  London,  where  they  met  comrades  of  like  speech,  and 
they    commenced    an    international    propaganda.      They 


BRITISH    SOCIALISM  225, 

first  called  their  association  the  Dcutschcr  Arbeiter-Bil 
dungsverein,  and  afterwards  the  Society  of  the  Fra- 
ternal Democrats,  their  aim  being  to  unite  the  Democra- 
cies of  all  nationalities.  The  original  basis  of  the 
League  was  a  sentimental  Communism,  based  on  their 
motto  that  "all  men  are  brothers."  The  philosophy  of 
Marx  in  due  time  moulded  the  views  of  the  League,  and 
in  1847,  through  his  influence,  these  exiles  held  a  Con- 
gress in  London,  and  reorganized  under  the  name  of 
the  Communist  League.  In  1848,  acting  on  behalf  of 
this  League,  Marx  and  Engels  issued  the  famous  Com- 
munist Manifesto.  This  document  may  be  described  as 
the  "Advance  Herald"  of  Marx's  Capital.  In  his  preface 
to  subsequent  editions  of  the  Manifesto,  Engels  says: 
"Drawn  up  in  German,  in  January,  1848,  the  manu- 
script was  sent  to  the  printer  in  London  a  few  weeks 
before  the  French  revolution  of  February  24th.  A 
French  translation  was  brought  out  in  Paris,  shortly 
before  the  insurrection  of  June,  1848.  The  first  Eng- 
lish translation,  by  Miss  Helen  Macfarlane,  appeared  in 
George  Julian  Harney's  Red  Republican,  London, 
1850."  As  to  the  League  itself,  in  the  form  of  the 
organization  under  the  auspices  of  which  the  Manifesto 
was  brought  out,  Engels,  in  the  preface,  has  this  to  say : 
"Wherever  independent  proletarian  movements  con- 
tinued to  show  life,  they  were  ruthlessly  hunted  down. 
Thus  the  Prussian  police  hunted  out  the  Central  Board 
of  the  Communist  League,  then  located  in  Cologne. 
The  members  were  arrested,  and,  after  eighteen  months' 
imprisonment,  they  were  tried  in  October,  1852.  This 
celebrated  'Cologne  Communist  trial'  lasted  from  Octo- 
ber 4th  till  November  12th;  seven  of  the  prisoners  were 
sentenced  to  terms  of  imprisonment  in  a  fortress,  vary- 


226  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

ing  from  three  to  six  years.  Immediately  after  the 
sentence  the  League  was  formally  dissolved  by  the 
remaining  members.  As  to  the  'Manifesto,'  it  seemed 
thenceforth  to  be  doomed  to  oblivion." 

The  "International''  sprang  from  the  above  move- 
ment, which  for  several  years  seems  to  have  lain  dor- 
mant. But  in  1862  some  French  workmen  visited  Lon- 
don to  see  the  International  Exhibition,  and  there  was 
an  exchange  of  ideas  among  the  comrades.  This  led 
to  a  meeting  held  in  London,  at  St.  Martin's  Hall,  Sep- 
tember 28th,  1863.  The  chair  was  occupied  by  Prof. 
Edward  Spencer  Beesley,  the  famous  Positivist  author 
and  radical  social  reformer,  who  in  1868  was  made  an 
honorary  member  of  the  Amalgamated  Society  of  Car- 
penters and  Joiners,  in  recognition  of  his  labors  in 
securing  the  removal  of  laws  unjust  to  Trade  Union- 
ists. The  "International"  was  organized  at  this  con- 
vention. Englishmen  were  elected  as  President,  Secre- 
tary, and  Treasurer  of  the  General  Council,  and  Corre- 
sponding Secretaries  were  elected  for  the  different 
affiliated  countries,  Marx  being  chosen  for  Germany.  A 
draft  constitution  was  prepared,  and  it  was  confirmed 
afterwards,  at  the  first  Congress  of  the  "International," 
at  Geneva,  in  1866.  At  the  London  meeting  an  address 
setting  forth  the  objects  of  the  movement  was  drawn 
up,  the  title  of  the  organization  being  "The  Inter- 
national Workingmcn's  Association."  This  address 
claimed  that  all  recent  revolutions  and  reforms  had 
been  in  the  interest  of  the  middle  classes,  with  no  result- 
ant improvement  of  the  condition  of  the  working  classes; 
that  the  workingmen  musl  emancipate  themselves;  and 
that  the  "International"  \va  designed  to  be  a  centre  of 
common    action    for    the    complete    deliverance    of    the 


BRITISH    SOCIALISM  227 

workingmen  of  the  world,  without  distinction  of  creed, 
nationality  or  color,  from  the  tyranny  of  capital.  The 
"International"  stood  for  different  things  in  different 
countries,  and  when  it  hecame  "continentalized,"  and 
revolutionary,  and  permeated  with  Socialism  of  the  most 
extreme  materialistic  doctrines,  it  lost  all  influence  in 
England.  Its  history  is  not  a  notable  one,  the  principal 
incident  in  its  brief  career  being  the  struggle  for 
supremacy  between  Marx  and  Bakounin,  the  Russian 
Nihilist.  Marx  won,  but  that  was  practically  the  end 
of  the  "International." 

The  Social  Democratic  Federation. 

With  the  practical  renunciation  of  the  "International" 
by  the  English  workingmen  on  account  of  its  material- 
istic aims  and  revolutionary  methods,  and  with  their 
absorbed  interest  in  Co-operation  and  Trade  Unionism, 
it  seemed  as  if  Socialism  had  been  put  away  perma- 
nently. But  the  fact  was  that  the  ground  was  only 
being  prepared  for  a  renewed,  a  second  and  a  stronger 
growth.  While  Co-operation  and  Trade  Unionism  were 
receiving  the  attention  of  the  working  classes,  and  dis- 
ciplining them  for  the  contest  soon  to  come,  the  "intel- 
lectuals" of  the  political  Radicals  were  having  developed 
among  them  a  mental  receptiveness  for  the  doctrines  of 
Marxian  Socialism.  The  theories  of  Henry  George  had 
taken  deep  root  in  the  English  mind,  among  all  classes 
— much  more  so  than  in  his  native  country.  Gladstone's 
policy  in  both  Ireland  and  Egypt  was  very  obnoxious  to 
the  Radical  element  in  the  Liberal  Party ;  and  the  leaven 
of  dissatisfaction  with  orthodox  politics  and  economics 
was  at  work.  Yet  for  years  there  was  no  public  indica- 
tion of  the  existence  of  any  Socialist  sentiment  in  Eng- 


228  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

land  except  among  the  foreign  refugees  in  the  Soho  dis- 
trict of  London.  Karl  Marx,  who  from  his  long  resi- 
dence in  England,  ought  to  have  thoroughly  understood 
the  English  people,  several  times  told  Henry  Mayers 
Hyndman  (the  most  active  English  Socialist  of  the  time) 
that  he  despaired  "of  any  great  movement  in  England, 
unless  in  response  to  some  violent  impetus  from  with- 
out." A  leading  member  of  the  defunct  and  discred- 
ited "International,"  Eugene  Dupont,  said :  "The  Eng- 
lish possess  all  the  materials  necessary  for  the  social 
revolution ;  but  they  lack  the  generalizing  spirit  and  the 
revolutionary  passion." 

But  finally  a  start  was  made  in  1881,  by  an  attempt 
to  unite  the  Radical  clubs  of  London  under  the  name 
of  the  Democratic  Federation.  Its  direct  aim  was  to 
secure  the  passage  of  measures  of  Radical  reform, 
including  land  nationalization;  and  real,  genuine,  Marx- 
ian, Revolutionary  Socialism  became  an  organized  fact 
two  years  afterwards,  within  the  Federation. 

There  are  different  accounts  as  to  how  this  revival  of 
Socialism  first  made  itself  manifest.  It  is  generally 
definitely  ascribed  to  the  action  of  the  Democratic  Fed- 
eration, in  1884,  in  declaring  for  Socialism,  and  at  the 
same  time  changing  its  name  to  the  Social  Democratic 
Federation.  But  Rae,  in  Contemporary  Socialism,  says 
that  "in  1883  a  Socialist  movement  seemed  to  break  out 
spontaneously  in  England,  the  air  hummed  for  a  season 
with  a  multifarious  social  agitation,  and  we  soon  had  a 
fairly  complete  equipmenl  of  Socialist  organizations — 
social  democratic,  anarchist,  dilettante — which  have  ever 
since  kept  Up  a  busy  movemenl  with  newspapers,  lec- 
ture ,  debates,  speeches,  and  demonstrations  in  the 
streets." 


BRITISH    SOCIALISM  229 

Whether  this  movement  was  the  result  of  a  deliberate 
plan  of  the  leading  spirits  of  the  original  Democratic 
Federation,  formed  in  1881,  or  whether  it  broke  out 
spontaneously,  as  suggested  by  Rae,  there  can  be  no 
doubt  as  to  the  establishment  of  Revolutionary  Social- 
ism in  England  at  last;  and  there  was  another  fact  of 
which  there  can  be  no  doubt,  viz.,  that  the  form  in  which 
it  came  was  a  German  importation :  Socialism  had  come 
back  to  the  land  of  its  birth,  but  it  had  come  with  a  new 
inspiration,  and  in  new  habiliments.  There  are  those 
who  insist  that  this  new  "Scientific,  Revolutionary"  So- 
cialism, as  hammered  out  by  the  German  Jew,  Karl 
Marx,  in  London,  from  crude  raw  material  which  was 
principally  English  in  origin,  and  which  had  been  tem- 
pered and  refined  in  a  scientific  manner  in  Germany,  is 
"the  last  word"  in  the  expression  of  Socialism  or  Eco- 
nomic Reform.  But  this  view  has  not  been  accepted  to 
any  great  extent  in  England,  and  it  is  getting  to  be  less 
and  less  the  prevailing  view  throughout  the  world. 

The  Social  Democratic  Federation  is  the  oldest  So- 
cialist organization  in  England,  with  the  exception  of 
the  Guild  of  St.  Matthew,  a  Church  of  England  Chris- 
tian Socialist  body,  founded  in  1877.  When  the  Federa- 
tion was  first  organized  it  Hung  the  flag  of  uncompro- 
mising Marxian  Socialism  to  the  breeze ;  that  "flag  is 
still  there,"  and  the  historic  policy  of  the  Federation 
has  been  one  of  "close  communion" — of  frigid  non- 
intercourse  with  heterodox  "Opportunists."  There  have 
been  few  intellectual  or  economic  movements  inau- 
gurated anywhere  by  such  a  brilliant  company  of  men 
and  women  as  that  which  took  part  in  the  organization 
and  early  career  of  the  Social  Democratic  Federation. 
At  their  head  was  Henry  Mayers  Hyndman,  who  after 


230  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

the  lapse  of  nearly  thirty  years  continues  his  premier 
position  in  the  leadership  of  the  Marxian  forces  in  Eng- 
land. Hyndman  has  had  a  remarkable  career.  After 
taking  his  degree  at  Oxford,  in  1864,  and  studying  law, 
he  went  through  the  Italian  campaign  of  1866  as  cor- 
respondent of  the  Pall  Mall  Gazette.  He  became  an 
authority  on  and  acrid  critic  of  Indian  affairs ;  was  a 
fiery  opponent  of  Gladstone's  "coercion  policy"  in  Ire- 
land; and  in  1886  he  was  tried  with  John  Burns  (now 
a  member  of  the  British  Cabinet)  and  several  others  for 
"uttering  sedition  and  inciting  to  violence"  in  a  speech 
to  the  unemployed  in  Trafalgar  Square,  London ;  but 
after  a  trial  lasting  three  days  they  were  all  acquitted. 
During  the  political  agitation  of  1909  he  became  promi- 
nent in  uniting  himself  with  Robert  Blatchford,  the 
editor  of  the  Socialist  Clarion,  in  urging  the  British 
people  to  prepare  themselves  to  withstand  an  invasion 
from  Germany — not  that  he  thinks  the  German  people 
themselves  want  to  take  England,  but  that  this,  as  he 
believes,  is  the  life-ambition  of  the  young  German 
Emperor  and  of  the  bureaucrats  surrounding  him.  As- 
sociated with  Hyndman  in  organizing  the  Social  Demo- 
cratic Eederation  were  the  famous  Positivist,  Prof. 
Beesley  (who  had  presided  at  the  organization  of  the 
"International")  ;  Joseph  Cowen,  M.  P.,  the  friend  of 
Mazzini  and  Garibaldi;  Helen  Taylor,  the  niece  of  John 
Stuart  Mill;  Belfort  Bax,  probably  the  most  incisive  and 
philosophical  writer  on  Socialism,  from  the  Marxian 
standpoint,  England  has  ever  produced;  and  Dr.  Ave- 
ling,  a  popular  writer  and  lecturer,  but  best  known  as 
the  son-in-law  of  Karl  Marx.  Others  who  early  joined 
the  Social  Democratic  Federation  were  William  Mor- 
ris, the   wonderfully  gifted  poet  and  artist — claimed  by 


BRITISH    SOCIALISM  231 

some  to  be  the  greatest  intellect  ever  associated  with 
Socialism;  John  Burns,  the  most  prominent  British 
labor  agitator  of  the  century,  but  now  repudiated  by  his 
old  comrades — at  least  by  the  noisiest  and  least  respon- 
sible of  them — because  of  his  acceptance  of  a  Cabinet 
position  under  the  present  Liberal  Administration;  Ber- 
nard Shaw,  the  famous  playwright  and  professional 
cynic,  who  subsequently  seceded  from  the  Federation 
and  became  the  leader  of  the  Fabians,  or  Opportunists; 
Sidney  Webb,  the  greatest  living  authority  on  Trade 
Unionism,  and  the  author  of  a  standard  work  on  So- 
cialism, and  now  also  a  Fabian;  Sir  Sydney  Olivier,  now 
the  Governor  of  Jamaica,  and  said  to  be  the  first  avowed 
Socialist  to  receive  a  responsible  appointment  from  the 
British  Crown ;  the  Rev.  Stewart  Headlam,  a  "Catholic" 
High  Anglican  Churchman,  and  founder  of  the  oldest 
British  Socialist  society,  the  Guild  of  St.  Matthew,  who 
is  now  classed  as  a  Fabian ;  Tom  Mann,  a  noted  Labor 
leader,  afterwards  at  the  head  of  the  Socialist  move- 
ment of  Australia,  but  who  returned  to  England  and 
was  at  the  forefront  in  the  violent  Labor  outbreak  in 
191 1  ;  and  Mrs.  Annie  Besant,  the  brilliant  but  erratic 
agnostic  and  literary  associate  of  the  greatest  Radical 
in  England  (but  a  strong  anti-Socialist),  Charles  Brad- 
laugh.  The  organ  of  the  Federation  is  Justice,  the  edi- 
tor of  which,  Henry  Quelch,  is  one  of  the  most  extreme 
Revolutionary  Socialists  in  England.  The  Federation 
also  has  two  month])-  reviews,  the  Social  Democrat,  and 
To-Day. 

The  Social  Democratic  Federation  (latterly  some- 
times called  the  Social  Democratic  Party)  is  the  most 
radical  organization  of  standing,  politically  and  eco- 
nomically, in  Great  Britain ;  it  is  often  designated  as  the 


2$2  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

"S.  D.  F.,"  and  its  object  is  officially  stated  to  be  as 

follows : 

The  socialization  of  the  means  of  production,  distribution, 
and  exchange,  to  be  controlled  by  a  democratic  state  in  the 
interests  of  the  entire  community,  and  the  complete  emanci- 
pation of  labor  from  the  domination  of  capitalism  and  land- 
lordism, with  the  establishment  of  social  and  economic 
equality  between  the  sexes. 

The   following  are  among  the   "immediate   reforms" 
demanded : 

Abolition  of  the  Monarchy ; 

Abolition  of  the  House  of  Lords; 

Payment  of   members   of  Parliament ; 

Adult  suffrage ; 

Proportional  representation ; 

Second  ballot ; 

Initiative   and    Referendum; 

Repudiation  of  the  National  Debt ; 

Abolition  of  all  indirect  taxation,  and  the  institution  of  a 
cumulative  tax  on  all  incomes  and  inheritances  exceeding 
three  hundred  pounds ; 

Free  and  compulsory  education  up  to  16  years  of  age; 

Land  nationalization  ;  and  nationalization  of  the  trusts,  rail- 
ways, docks,  canals,  and  all  great  means  of  transit; 

Public  ownership  and  control  of  gas,  electric  light,  water 
supplies,  tramways  [street  cars],  omnibus,  and  other  loco- 
motive  services;  of  the  food  and  coal  supply,  the  lifeboat 
service,  ho  pita!  .  di  pensaries,  cemeteries,  and  crematoria, 
and  the  drink  traffic;  and  the  establishment  of  State  and 
municipal  kink  .  pawnshops,  and  public  restaurants; 

Eighl  hour  working  day,  as  a  maximum; 

Fre<  dom  ol   lab  u    combinati<  ins  ; 

employment  of  children  under   16  years  of  age; 

Public  provi  ion  of  work  at  trade  union  rates; 

Free  State  insurance,  and  State  pensions  for  the  -f.^-A  or 
disabled , 


BRITISH    SOCIALISM  233 

A  minimum   wage  of  thirty  shillings  a  week;   equal  pay  for 

both  sexes ; 
Public  dwellings  for  the  people  at  cost,  without  counting  the 

cost  of  the  land; 
Free  administration  of  justice,  and  free  legal  advice; 
Disestablishment   and   disendowment   of  all   State  chun 
Abolition  of  standing  armies,  and  establishment  of  national 

citizen  forces,  the  people  to  decide  on  peace  and  war. 

Sidney  Webb,  who  was  one  of  the  early  members, 
thus  describes  the  Social  Democratic  Federation,  in  his 
book  specially  written  for  American  readers,  Socialism 
in  England: 

In  economics  it  professes  to  follow  Karl  Marx;  in  politics 
it  is  "Collcctivist"  as  well  as  extremely  democratic,  and  is 
marked  by  a  tone  of  bitter  repudiation  of  both  liberal  and 
conservative  politicians.  It  denounces  especially  the  "Con- 
servatism" of  the  trades  union  leaders,  and  the  working 
members  of  Parliament,  as  well  as  the  "Jingo"  foreign  policy 
'carried  on  by  both  great  parties  in  the  interests  of  capitalists 
and  the  aristocracy. 

The  Social  Democratic  Federation  has  not  made  much 
of  an  impression  upon  English  public  life.  Of  recent 
years  it  has  entered  the  political  field,  but  it  has  not 
attracted  many  votes.  Foreign  observers  who  have 
measured  the  Socialist  situation  in  England  by  these 
results,  and  do  not  understand  the  complications  of  the 
English  Labor-Socialist  alliance,  have  not  properly  esti- 
mated the  strength  of  the  general  movement.  The  fact 
is,  the  "S.  D.  F."  is  too  "Marxian"  for  British  condi- 
tions and  British  habits  of  thought  and  British  national 
characteristics.  Mr.  Hyndman  is  evidently  of  Teutonic 
origin ;  it  is  certain  he  has  the  Teutonic  philosophical 
and  logical  temperament,  rather  than  the  British  prac~ 


234  WHAT   IS    SOCIALISM? 

tical  spirit  of  Opportunism.  He  and  the  organization 
to  which  he  has  devoted  his  life  have  adopted  the  Ger- 
man expression  of  Socialism ;  but  that  expression  does 
not  appeal  to  any  great  number  of  Englishmen. 

So,  it  is  not  to  be  wondered  at  that,  although  it  is 
the  second  oldest  of  the  Socialist  organizations  of  Great 
Britain,  the  "S.  D.  F."  does  not  cut  much  of  a  figure  in 
actual  political  results,  high  intellectually  though  its 
literary  advocates  are.  In  1906  the  Federation  polled 
only  29,810  votes,  in  a  general  election,  electing  one 
member  of  Parliament — Will  Thorne,  in  West  Ham, 
one  of  the  poorest  districts  of  London.  In  1907,  it 
elected  another  member,  Victor  Grayson,  in  a  famous 
"bye"  election  in  Colne  Valley,  a  mining  district  of 
Yorkshire.  Mr.  Grayson  was  "suspended  from  the 
service  of  the  House"  for  boisterous  conduct  and  refus- 
ing to  obey  the  order  of  the  Speaker;  and  it  is  signifi- 
cant that  although  his  conduct  was  avowedly  based  on 
the  well-intentioned  determination  to  force  the  atten- 
tion of  the  Government  to  the  deplorable  condition  of 
the  unemployed,  yet  it  did  not  receive  the  support  of  the 
Labor-Socialists.  The  report  of  the  "S.  D.  F."  for  the 
year  ending  March,  1907,  gave  the  number  of  branches 
and  affiliated  societies  at  186;  and  in  that  year  it  had 
about  120  adherents  who  were  members  of  various 
elected  bodies,  although  probably  a  majority  were 
elected  independently  of  their  Socialist  views. 

At  the  annual  conference  held  in  1908,  a  proposal 
that  the  Federation  should  join  the  Labor  Party  in  view 
of  the  fact  that  the  latter  had  declared  that  its  ultimate 
object  was  the  realization  of  Socialism,  was  rejected  by 
130  to  30  votes.  Mr.  Quclch  declared  in  Justice  that 
the  Labor  Party  was  "undemocratic  in  character,"  and 


BRITISH    SOCIALISM  235 

he  objected  to  a  Socialist  Party  "being  tied  to  the  heels 
of  a  non-Socialist  Party." 

At  this  conference  the  following  resolution,  offered  by 
Mr.  Qnelch,  was  carried  without  opposition: 

That  in  view  of  the  efforts  of  enemies  of  Socialism  to 
create  division  and  prejudice  in  the  ranks  of  the  workers  by 
raising  sectarian  disputes,  this  conference  definitely  reaf- 
firms the  position  always  maintained  by  the  International 
Social  Democracy,  that  the  Socialist  movement  is  concerned 
solely  with  secular  affairs,  and  regards  religion  as  a  private 
matter. 

At  the  twenty-eighth  conference  of  the  Social  Demo- 
cratic Party  (as  it  now  seems  to  prefer  to  be  called), 
held  in  August,  1908,  there  were  present  140  delegates, 
representing  112  branches  and  two  affiliated  societies. 
The  organization  is  strongest  in  London,  where  the 
headquarters  are  situated.  During  the  year  57  new 
branches  had  been  added;  there  are  13  "Socialist  Cir- 
cles" for  women  affiliated  with  the  party ;  and  the  total 
number  of  the  branches  at  the  commencement  of  1909 
is  given  as  about  250. 

Villiers  claims  that  the  first  and  greatest  of  the  men 
who  were  instrumental  in  shaping  the  German-Marxian 
Socialism  of  the  Social  Democratic  Federation  into 
something  more  in  keeping  with  English  ideas  was 
William  Morris,  the  poet  and  artist.  The  resignation 
of  Morris  from  the  Federation  and  the  founding  by  him 
of  a  rival  organization.  The  Socialist  League,  is  given 
as  evidence  of  this  recognition  by  him  of  the  necessity 
of  "Anglicizing"  the  movement.  But  the  League  was 
just  as  "un-English"  as  the  Federation.  There  were 
personal  reasons  which  influenced  Morris  in  withdraw- 


236  WHAT   IS    SOCIALISM? 

ing  from  the  Federation ;  but  he  was  also  opposed  to 
the  methods  of  the  Federation  in  advancing  the  Social- 
ist cause.  The  League  acknowledged  the  Collectivist 
principle  as  to  the  public  control  of  the  instruments  of 
production  and  distribution,  but  it  also  accepted  the 
philosophic-Anarchist  doctrine  that  the  control  should 
be  by  free  communal  groups.  The  organ  of  the  League 
was  the  Commonweal,  which  was  edited  by  Morris. 
The  League  did  not  have  much  influence,  and  it  soon 
went  out  of  existence.  While  Morris  had  leanings  to 
philosophic-Anarchism,  he  was  not  a  revolutionary  An- 
archist, and  when  the  League  showed  tendencies  in  the 
latter  direction,  he  withdrew  from  it.  After  the  col- 
lapse of  the  League,  Morris  identified  himself  with  its 
successor,  the  Hammersmith  Socialist  Society.  A 
prominent  member  of  the  Socialist  League  was  Bruce 
Glasier,  now  well  known  as  the  editor  of  the  Labor- 
Leader,  the  organ  of  the  Independent  Labor  Party. 

"Fabianism." 

Probably  the  most  widely-known  of  all  Socialist 
organizations  throughout  the  world  is  that  of  the  Eng- 
lish Fabians;  and,  politics  aside,  it  has  undoubtedly  done 
more  to  influence  intellectual  opinion  throughout  the 
world — but  particularly  in  England  and  America — in 
favor  of  Socialism,  than  any  Other  agency  or  associa- 
tion. And  yet  it  is  not  a  large  organization,  its  total 
membership  in  [908  being  loss  than  3,000,  about  2,500  of 
whom  belonged  to  the  parent  society  in  London.  There 
are  branches  in  the  principal  British  cities,  and  several 
affiliated  university  societies.  The  Fabians  in  1910  had 
11  members  in  the  House  of  Commons — 5  sitting  as 
Liberals,  and   6  as  members  of  the  Labor   Party.     The 


BRITISH    SOCIALISM  237 

leading  living  Fabian  is  the  well-known  playwright,  G. 
Bernard  Shaw.  He  claims  (preface  to  1908  edition  of 
Fabian  Essays)  that :  "Since  1889  the  Socialist  move- 
ment has  been  completely  transformed  throughout 
Europe ;  and  the  result  of  the  transformation  may 
fairly  be  described  as  Fabian  Socialism."  This  is  un- 
questionably true  so  far  as  England  is  concerned ;  but 
as  to  the  Continent,  a  denial  would  be  entered  by  the 
German  Marxists,  although  even  in  Germany  there  is 
an  increasing  tendency  to  adopt  Fabian  Opportunism. 

Strange  to  say,  it  was  an  American  who  started  the 
ball  to  roll  which  ended  in  the  formation  of  the  Fabian 
Society,  his  name  being  Thomas  Davidson,  of  New 
York.  He  happened  to  be  in  London  in  the  autumn  of 
1883,  when  there  was  a  great  deal  of  talk  about  So- 
cialism, growing  out  of  the  English  campaign  of  Henry 
George  and  the  pending  organization  of  the  Social 
Democratic  Federation.  Under  the  leadership  of  Mr. 
Davidson  a  series  of  meetings  of  an  informal  nature 
were  held,  at  which  social  questions  were  discussed.  An 
organization  called  the  "New  Fellowship"  was  formed, 
and  a  quarterly  journal  named  Seedtime  was  published. 
The  members  of  the  "New  Fellowship"  laid  supreme 
stress  on  the  need  for  ethical  and  spiritual  changes  as 
constant  factors  in  the  social  movement,  while  others 
associated  with  them  in  the  conferences  called  by  Mr. 
Davidson  favored  the  social  and  political  changes  de- 
manded by  the  Social  Democratic  Federation,  to  be 
brought  about  gradually,  however,  as  opportunity  of- 
fered. It  was  this  latter  group  who  organized  the  far- 
famed  Fabian  Society. 

The  Fabians  may  be  described  as  "Intellectual  Op- 
portunists."    One  of  the    founders   of  the   society,   the 


238  WHAT   IS    SOCIALISM? 

late  William  Clarke,  M.  A.  (and  one  of  the  writers  of 
the  well-known  Fabian  Essays),  has  explained  that  the 
Fabians  propose  to  "conquer  by  delay."  The  Roman 
General,  Quintus  Fabius  Maximus,  was  adopted  as  the 
patron  saint  of  the  society.  The  following  is  the  motto 
of  the  Fabians :  "For  the  right  moment  you  must  wait, 
as  Fabius  did,  most  patiently,  when  warring  against 
Hannibal,  though  many  censured  his  delays ;  but  when 
the  time  comes  you  must  strike  hard,  as  Fabius  did,  or 
your  waiting  will  be  in  vain  and  fruitless."  This  double 
policy,  then,  as  Clarke  says,  of  waiting  and  striking,  is 
the  general  idea  of  the  society.  It  is  now  generally 
recognized  in  England  by  the  anti-Socialists,  that 
through  this  policy,  and  because  of  the  fact  that  it  is 
being  backed  up  by  greater  intellectual  activity  and 
adroiter  diplomacy  than  are  engaged  in  any  other  eco- 
nomic or  political  organization  in  existence,  anywhere 
(with  the  possible  exception  of  the  German  Social 
Democracy),  the  Fabians  have  become  the  most  dan- 
gerous of  all  the  various  groups  of  Socialists;  and.  at 
the  same  time,  they  are  the  most  suave  and  "respecta- 
ble." 

As  to  the  basis  of  the  Fabian  Society,  the  following 
is  taken  from  the  official  statement : 

The  Fabian  Society  cousins  of  Socialists. 

Tt  therefore  aims   at  the  reorganization  of   Society   by  the 
emancipation  of  Land  and   Industrial  Capital  from  individual 
and    class  ownership,   and   the   vesting   of   them    in    the   com 
niuuity  for  the  general  benefit.    .    .    . 

The    Society    accordingly    works    for    the    extinction    of 

private  property  in  land  ami  the  consequent  individual  appro 
priation  in  the  form  of  Kent,  of  the  price  paid  for  permission 
to   use   the   earth   as  well   as   for  the  advantages  of  superior 
soils  and  sites. 


I '.KIT]  SI  I    SOCIALISM  239 

The  Society  further  works  for  the  transfer  to  the  com- 
munity of  the  administration  of  such  Industrial  Capital  as 
can  conveniently  be  managed  socially. 

The  Fabian  Society  was  so  called  to  distinguish  it  in 
the  beginning  from  the  only  Socialism  that  existed  in 
England  in  the  early  eighties — a  wild,  red  revolutionary 
Socialism  which  sought  to  stir  up  the  proletariat  to  a 
violent  insurrection.  The  word  "Fabian"  has  passed 
into  the  English  language  as  a  synonym  for  "cautious- 
ness." A  Fabian  policy  is  a  cautious  policy.  The  effort 
has  been  to  make  people  understand  that  Fabian  So- 
cialism is  of  a  kind  which  is  thoughtful,  brainy,  and 
responsible ;  the  name  is  admitted  to  be  rather  whimsical, 
but  its  intention  is  plain,  and  the  English  people  have 
now  fairly  grasped  its  significance. 

Fabians  aim  at  State,  National,  and  Municipal  owner- 
ship and  control  of  land  and  capital,  and  they  consider 
it  better  to  socialize  a  part  of  the  land  or  capital  for 
the  benefit  of  all,  than  to  socialize  everything  in  a  given 
small  area  for  the  benefit  of  a  few.  That  is  why  the 
Fabians,  while  being  Opportunists,  are  not  cordial  to 
Communistic  experiments,  or  even  to  Co-operation,  for, 
in  their  view,  the  communals  or  co-operators  really 
became  a  close  corporation  of  proprietors  holding 
against  the  main  body  of  the  people. 

The  Independent  Labor  Party. 

Fabianism  breathed  the  breath  of  life  into  the  coldly 
philosophical  materialism  of  Marxian  Socialism,  and 
substituted  gradual,  practical,  every-day  experience  and 
ameliorative  changes  in  public  matters  and  social  af- 
fairs for  the  vision  of  a  dimly-distant  revolutionary 
Collective  Commonwealth.     But,  there  was  yet  an  ele- 


240  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

merit  wanting ;  and  Trade  Unionism  supplied  it.  The 
Independent  Labor  Party,  and  especially  the  Labor 
Party,  became  the  fighting-force  of  British  Socialism. 
Until  Labor,  with  its  good,  strong  right  arm,  "took  up" 
Socialism,  it  was  little  more  effective  or  to  be  feared 
than — say  Theosophy ! 

During  a  visit  to  Canada  a  few  years  ago,  Keir  Har- 
die,  the  Labor-Socialist  Member  of  Parliament,  is  re- 
ported to  have  said,  in  reply  to  a  question,  "There  is 
no  class  struggle."  And  yet,  the  Independent  Labor 
Party,  of  which  he  was  the  founder,  was  organized 
primarily  because  of  a  controversy  growing  out  of  a 
"class  struggle."  The  immediate  occasion  of  its  forma- 
tion was  a  strike  at  Bradford,  the  capitalists,  both  Con- 
servatives and  Liberals,  uniting  to  defeat  the  men.  As 
a  consequence,  the  men  decided  to  start  independent 
political  action ;  a  conference  was  called,  and  the  Inde- 
pendent Labor  Party  was  founded.  At  first,  the  con- 
troversy was  merely  a  clash  between  Capital  and  Labor, 
but  very  soon  Socialism  as  a  definite  issue  became  the 
cardinal  principle  of  the  organization. 

It  has  been  remarked  that  although  Scotland  is  a 
democratic  country — indeed,  in  a  political  sense,  it  is 
more  so  than  England — yet,  until  recently,  it  has  not 
been  prominent  in  social  reform.  Even  at  the  present 
time  Socialism  proper  has  not  made  nearly  as  much 
headway  in  Scotland  as  it  has  in  England,  although 
some  of  the  Socialist  leaders  in  England  are  Scotch- 
men— as>  for  instance,  Keir  Iiardie  himself,  and  the 
intellectual  leader  of  Labor-Socialism,  Ramsay  Mac- 
donald.  But  Scotland  led  England  in  actual  Labor- 
Socialist  organization.  The  pioneer  avowedly  Socialist 
organization    in    Scotland    was    the    Land    and    Labor 


BRITISH    SOCIALISM  241 

League,  founded  in  Edinburgh  in  1883.  The  Social  Demo- 
cratic League  and  the  Socialist  League  shortly  after- 
wards established  branches  in  Edinburgh,  Glasgow,  and 
a  few  other  towns.  The  President  of  the  Miners'  Union 
was  a  remarkable  young  man  named  James  Keir  I  lar- 
die.  When  he  was  only  eight  years  old  he  went  to  work 
in  a  mine  as  doorkeeper,  and  he  worked  in  the  mines 
until  he  was  twenty-three  years  of  age.  A  trouble 
arose  with  the  mine  owners,  and  young  Hardie  came 
to  the  front  as  leader,  and  was  elected  Secretary  of  the 
Union,  and  afterwards  President.  In  1888  he  founded 
the  Scottish  Labor  Party,  which  thus  became  the  fore- 
runner of  the  Independent  Labor  Party  of  Great 
Britain.  The  same  year  Keir  Hardie  ran  as  a  Socialist 
candidate  for  Parliament  in  Mid-Lanark,  but  was  de- 
feated. He  now  represents  a  Welsh  constituency,  Mer- 
thyr  Tydfil,  although  he  is  often  spoke.,  of  as  "the 
Member  for  the  Unemployed." 

At  the  Labor  conference  held  at  Bradford,  in  1893, 
Keir  Hardie  took  a  prominent  part,  and  it  was  largely 
through  his  efforts  that  the  Independent  Labor  Party 
was  formed.  From  the  first,  the  organization  was  So- 
cialist, although  the  word  "Socialist"  was  not  incor- 
porated in  the  name.  In  1894  the  constitution  was 
amended,  and  its  object  was  declared  to  be  "the  Col- 
lective ownership  and  control  of  the  means  of  produc- 
tion, distribution,  and  exchange." 

The  official  statement  (1909)  of  the  programme  and 
demands  of  the  Independent  Labor  Party  is  as  follows : 

Object. 
An  Industrial  Commonwealth  founded  upon  the  socializa- 
tion  of  land   and   capital. 


242  WHAT   IS    SOCIALISM? 

Methods. 
The    education    of    the    community    in    the    principles    of 
Socialism; 
The   industrial  and   political   organization  of  the  workers; 
The   independent  representation   of   Socialist  principles   in 
all  elective  bodies. 

Programme. 
The  true  object   of  industry  being  the  production  of  the 
requirements  of  life,  the  responsibility  should  rest  with  the 
community  collectively;  therefore: 

The  land,  being  the  storehouse  of  all  the  necessaries  of 
life,  should  be  declared  and  treated  as  public  property; 

The  capital  necessary  for  industrial  operations  should  be 
owned  and  used  collectively. 

Demands. 
As  a  means  tn  this  end,  the  Independent  Labor  Party  de- 
mands the  enactment  of  the  following  measures   [summar- 
ized] : 
A  forty-eight  hours'  working  week  ; 

Provisions   of   work,   at   trade    union    rates,   with    a   mini- 
mum of  sixpence   [12  cents]  per  hour; 

Parish,  district,  borough,  and  county  councils  to  be  in- 
vested with  powers  to  organize  and  undertake  such  indus- 
tries as  they  may  consider  desirable:  to  compulsorily  ac- 
quire land;  to  purchase,  erect,  or  manufacture  buildings, 
stock,  or  other  articles  for  carrying  on  such  industries;  to 
levy  rates  on  the  rental  values  of  the  district,  and  borrow 
money  on  the  security  of  such  rates  for  any  of  the  above 
purposes ; 

State  pensions  for  every  person  over  50  years  of  age, 
and  adequate  provision  for  all  widows,  orphans,  sick,  and 
disabled  workers; 

Free  secular,  moral,  primary,  secondary,  and  university 
education,  with  free  maintenance  while  al  school  or  uni- 
versity ; 
Raising  of  the  age  of  child  labor; 
Municipalization  and  public  control  of  the  drink  traffic; 
Municipalization  and  public  control  of  all  hospitals  and 
infirmaries; 


BRITISH    SOCIALISM  243 

Abolition  of  indirecl  taxation  and  the  gradual  transfer- 
ence of  all  public  burdens  on  to  unearned  incomes  with  a 
view  to  their  ultimate  extinction; 

Adult  suffrage;  equal  rights  to  women  with  men;  trien- 
nial parliaments;  and  second  ballot. 

In  1895  the  party  had  28  Parliamentary  candidates  in 
the  field,  but  it  did  not  elect  any;  it  polled  altogether 
44,321  votes. 

In  1900,  at  the  general  election  (called  the  "Khaki" 
election,  on  account  of  the  Boer  War  being  an  issue), 
there  were  10  Parliamentary  seats  contested,  but  only 
one  candidate  was  elected — J.  Keir  Hardie,  for  Merthyr 
Tydfil.  On  a  straight-out  Socialist  and  anti-war  plat- 
form, the  party  as  a  whole  polled  37,209  votes. 

At  the  General  Election  of  1906  (when  the  present 
Liberal  Government  secured  power,  with  the  largest 
party  majority  in  modern  times)  the  Independent  La- 
bor Partv  worked  in  conjunction  with  the  Labor  Repre- 
sentation Committee  (now  the  Labor  Party).  Thus 
working  in  alliance,  the  Independent  Labor  Party  nomi- 
nated 10  Parliamentary  candidates,  and  elected  7 ;  and 
of  the  thirty  members  of  the  Labor  Party  who  were 
elected  as  such,  11  of  them  were  also  members  of  the 
Independent  Labor  Party.  Through  its  various  groups 
and  alliances,  the  Socialist-Labor  Party  controlled  55 
votes  in   Parliament. 

In  August,  1907,  the  Independent  Labor  Party  had 
over  700  branches,  of  which  155  had  been  formed  in 
the  preceding  six  months.  In  1908,  the  organization 
had  765  branches.  The  total  paying-membership  was 
then  estimated  at  over  40,000.  and  its  income  and  ex- 
penditure at  £100,000. 

The    Independent    Labor    Party    had    in    1909    about 


244  WHAT   IS    SOCIALISM? 

900  representatives  on  town,  county,  district,  and  other 
local  governing  bodies. 

The  organ  of  the  Party  is  the  Labor  Leader,  founded 
and  formerly  edited  by  Keir  Hardie,  but  now  edited 
by  J.  Bruce  Glasier,  who  was  one  of  the  first  to  identify 
himself  with  definite  Socialism  in  Great  Britain.  Glasier 
was  one  of  the  founders  of  the  Scotch  Social  Demo- 
cratic Federation,  and  was  one  of  the  contributors  to 
Morris's  Commonweal. 

The  Labor  Party. 

Even  in  England  there  is  much  confusion  with  regard 
to  the  composition  of  British  Socialism,  and  especially 
as  to  the  Labor-Socialists : — as  to  the  identity  of  the  dif- 
ferent organizations,  their  relationship  to  each  other, 
and  as  to  the  relationship  of  the  Socialist  organizations 
as  a  whole  to  Trade  LTnionism  as  a  separate  movement ; 
and  this  confusion  applies  particularly  to  the  connection 
between  Socialism  and  Labor  in  the  House  of  Com- 
mons. It  is  not  to  be  wondered  at  that  foreign  stu- 
dents of  Socialism  are  bewildered  over  the  complica- 
tions of  the  relationship  between  these  various  organiza- 
tions. This  confusion  is  increased  by  the  similarity  of 
names  of  the  Independent  Labor  Party  and  the  Labor 
Party  (the  latter  until  lately  being  known  as  the  Par- 
liamentary Labor  Representation  Committee).  The 
consequence  is  that  there  is  a  failure  on  the  Continent 
and  in  America  to  understand  adequately  or  to  appre- 
ciate fully  the  development  and  the  present  status  of 
British  Socialism.  Of  the  American  writers  on  Social- 
ism Robert  Hunter  is  one  of  the  few  who  clearly  un- 
derstand the  situation  as  to  both  the  peculiar  relation- 
ship existing  between  the  different  Socialist  and  Labor 


BRITISH    SOCIALISM  MS 

organizations  to  each  other,  and  the  methods  and  the 
spirit  of  present-day   militant    British   Socialism. 

The  Labor  Party  is  not  really  a  Party  at  all,  and  the 
name  is  a  misnomer.  It  is  a  Federation  of  organizations 
to  secure  the  election  of  Labor  members  of  Parliament, 
and  the  enactment  of  laws  favorable  to  Labor.  Yet,  as 
an  organization,  it  has  no  political  or  economic  pro- 
gramme ;  it  is  not  by  name  Socialist,  but  it  is  the  most 
important  Socialist  political  force  in  England  to-day. 

The  fundamental  idea  of  the  so-called  Labor  Party 
was  not  originally  Socialism — and  is  not  now — but  the 
direct  representation  of  Labor  in  Parliament.  As  long 
back  as  1874  there  were  thirteen  candidates  for  election 
as  direct  representatives  of  Labor  in  Parliament,  and 
two  of  these  were  successful.  In  1892,  at  the  General 
election,  there  were  other  Labor  successes,  among  those 
elected  being  John  Burns,  one  of  the  most  famous  of 
the  Trade  Union  leaders,  and  now  one  of  the  most  dis- 
liked men  living,  on  the  part  of  many  of  his  former 
comrades,  partly  because  he  has  since  told  them  some 
plain  but  unwelcome  truths,  but  principally  because  of 
a  mean,  petty  spirit  of  proscription  and  jealousy  on  their 
part,  he  deeming  it  not  beneath  his  dignity  and  honor 
as  a  workingman  and  a  British  subject  to  take  office  in 
the  present  Government,  where  he  has  labored  unceas- 
ingly to  benefit  the  class  to  which  he  belongs.  Without 
unfairness  it  can  be  charged  that  narrow-minded  intol- 
erance is  a  characteristic  of  professional  Socialists,  not 
only  in  England  but  generally. 

The  Labor  Representation  Committee  (now  the  La- 
bor Party)  was  formed  in  1900.  It  was,  and  is  now, 
a  political  committee  composed  of  representatives  of 
Trade    Unions    and    Socialist    societies,    to    indorse    and 


246  WHAT   IS    SOCIALISM? 

support  the  candidates  nominated  by  its  constituent 
Unions  and  societies.  The  organization  definitely  orig- 
inated at  the  Trade  Union  Congress  held  at  Plymouth, 
in  1899,  when  a  resolution  was  adopted  calling  for  a 
conference  of  Trade  Union,  Co-operative,  Socialistic, 
and  other  working-class  organizations  to  consider  La- 
bor-political representation.  This  conference  was  held 
in  London,  February  20-28,  1900,  societies  being  repre- 
sented with  a  membership  of  nearly  600,000,  of  which 
all  were  Trade  Unionists  with  the  exception  of  22,861, 
who  were  designated  as  Socialists.  At  this  conference 
a  Labor  Representation  Committee  was  formed ;  since 
then  annual  conferences  have  been  held ;  and  at  the  con- 
ference in  1906  the  name  was  changed  to  that  of  the 
Labor  Party. 

Constitution   and  Organization. 

The  Labor  Party  is  a  Federation  consisting  of  Trades 
Unions,  Trades  Councils,  Socialist  Societies,  and  Local  Labor 
Parties.     Co-operative  Societies  are  also  eligible. 

1.  Candidates  and  members  must  accept  this  constitution; 
agree  to  abide  by  the  decisions  of  the  Parliamentary  Party 
in  carrying  out  the  aims  of  this  Constitution ;  appear  before 
their  constituencies  under  the  title  of  Labor  Candidates  only; 
abstain  strictly  from  identifying  themselves  with  or  pro- 
moting the  interests  of  any  party  not  eligible  for  affiliation; 
and  they  must  not  oppose  any  Candidate  recognized  by  the 
Executive  Committee  of  the  Party. 

2.  Candidates  must  undertake  to  join  the  Parliamentary 
Labor  Party,  if  elected. 

Formerly  the  Trade  Unions  and  Socialist  and  other 
organizations  affiliated  with  the  Labor  Party  were 
assessed  to  pay  political  expenses  and  the  salaries  of 
their  members  of  Parliament.     This  was  a  great  bone 


BRITISH    SOCIALISM  247 

of  contention  on  the  part  of  many  individual  Trade 
Unionists,  but  the  difficulty  has  been  largely  overcome 
since  the  passage  of  the  law  in  191 1  providing  for  the 
payment  of  members  of  Parliament. 

The  affairs  of  the  committee  of  the  Labor  Party  are 
transacted  by  an  executive  committee  of  13,  of  whom 
nine  represent  the  Trade  Unions,  one  the  Trade  Coun- 
cils, and  three  the  Socialist  societies. 

At  the  General  Election  of  1900,  the  Labor  Repre- 
sentation Committee  endorsed  fifteen  candidates  for 
Parliament,  of  whom  two  were  elected — Richard  Bell, 
at  Derby  (the  President  of  the  Railwaymen's  Unions), 
and  Keir  Hardie,  at  Merthyr  Tydfil.  In  1902,  David 
James  Shackelton,  a  weaver  and  Trade  Union  leader, 
was  endorsed  by  the  committee,  and  was  returned  un- 
opposed for  the  Clitheroe  District,  Lancashire.  He  was 
made  Chairman  of  the  Parliamentary  Committee  of  the 
Trade  Union  Congress,  and  has  been  made  Chairman 
of  the  Labor  Party  in  the  House  of  Commons,  although 
he  is  not  a  Socialist.  In  1910  he  was  appointed  Labor 
Advisor  to  the   British   Government. 

In  the  General  Election  of  January,  1906,  the  Commit- 
tee endorsed  53  candidates  for  Parliament,  and  elected 
30  members.  Besides  these,  23  Labor  members  were 
elected  on  the  nomination  of  various  Trade  Union 
bodies,  independent  of  other  parties.  These  53  Labor- 
Socialist  members — for  that  is  what  they  really  are — 
did  not  include  a  number  of  other  "Laborites"  and 
Eabian  Socialists  or  "Independents"  affiliated  with  the 
Radical  wing  of  the  Liberal  Party. 

Later  on  in  the  Session,  the  number  of  members 
officially  classed  as  Labor-Socialists  (although  several 
are   not   avowed   Socialists,  strictly  speaking),   was   55, 


248  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

of  whom  49  are  returned  from  England,  4  from  Wales, 
and  2  from  Scotland.  It  is  very  significant  that  no  So- 
cialists are  returned  from  Ireland,  although  a  number 
of  the  Home-Rule  "Nationalists"  are  given  occasionally 
to  coquetting  with  the  Socialists,  and  as  a  consequence 
sometimes  incur  disciplinary  censure  from  the  ecclesi- 
astics of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church.  Among  the  55 
Labor-Socialist  members  was  Victor  Grayson,  the 
"stormy  petrel"  of  British  Socialism.  He  scorned  to  be 
classed  among  the  "Laborites,"  but  was  proud  of  being 
distinguished  as  the  only  "pure  and  simple"  Marxian 
Revolutionary  Socialist  in  the  British  Parliament.  He 
is  a  self-made  man,  and,  while  somewhat  eccentric,  is 
possessed  of  no  little  ability.  He  was  endorsed  by  the 
Independent  Labor  Party,  but  not  by  the  Labor  Party. 
He  was  elected  at  a  bye-election  in  July,  1907,  in  the 
Colne  Valley  (Yorkshire)  district,  his  election  creating 
a  great  sensation  through  Great  Britain,  for  two 
reasons :  It  was  the  first  time  in  the  history  of  Parlia- 
ment that  an  out-and-out  Revolutionary  Socialist,  with- 
out qualification,  Labor  or  otherwise,  had  ever  been 
elected ;  and  then  Grayson  defeated  both  his  Liberal  and 
Conservative  opponents  combined,  the  Liberal  candidate 
being  a  son  of  John  Bright. 

Socialism  Submerges  Trade  Unionism. 

The  extraordinary  success  of  the  Labor-Socialists  in 
the  General  Elections  of  1906  sent  a  thrill  of  enthusiasm 
through  the  ranks;  and  the  conservative  elements  of 
society  and  the  anti  Socialists  became  much  alarmed. 
There  was  one  greal  fad  standing  out  like  a  mountain 
peak  in  British  politics,  and  that  was  that  Socialistic 
ideas    had    got   the   complete   ascendency   in   the   Trade 


BRITISH    SOCIALISM  249 

Unions — the  biggest   organized    force   in   the   Kingdom. 

The  last  of  the  great  Trade  Unions  to  hold  out 
against  the  Socialist  alliance  was  the  Miners'  Federa- 
tion ;  and  the  fact  is  worth  noting  because  in  the  United 
States  the  Miners'  Unions  in  the  Western  States  have 
been  the  first  of  the  native  American  Labor  organiza- 
tions to  declare  for  Socialism.  In  1906  the  British 
Miners'  Federation,  which  is  the  largest  Labor  organ- 
ization in  the  United  Kingdom  (having  a  membership 
of  over  500,000),  rejected  a  proposal  to  affiliate  with 
the  Labor  Party  (which  is  Socialist,  as  explained 
above),  by  101,714  to  92,222 — a  majority  of  9,492 
against.  In  1907  the  ballot  resulted  in  213,317  for 
affiliation,  to  168,294  against — a  majority  of  45,023  in 
favor  of  affiliation.  The  Miners'  Federation  have  15 
Members  of  Parliament. 

The  Labor  Party  has  committed  itself — and  in  so  do- 
ing has  committed  the  Trade  Unions  affiliated  with  it — 
to  International  Socialism.  At  the  International  So-' 
cialist  Bureau,  which  met  at  Brussels  October  10-12, 
1908,  the  most  important  matter  which  came  up  for 
settlement  was  the  application  of  the  British  Labor 
Party  for  representation  in  the  International  Socialist 
Congresses.  The  question  had  been  referred  to  the 
Bureau  by  the  preceding  International  Socialist  Con- 
gress, held  at  Stuttgart.  Karl  Kautsky,  the  famous 
German  Socialist  editor,  offered  the  following  resolu- 
tion : 

In  consideration  of  the  resolutions  of  past  International 
Congresses,  accepting  all  the  organizations  which  take  up 
their  stand  upon  the  ground  of  the  class  struggle  and  recog- 
nize the  need  of  political  action ; 

The  International  Bureau  declares  that  it  admits  the  Eng- 


250  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

lish  Labor  Party  to  the  International  Congresses,  because, 
without  explicitly  accepting  the  proletarian  class  struggle, 
it  is  practically  engaged  in  that  struggle :  because,  thanks  to 
its  own  organization,  it  is  independent  of  the  bourgeois  par- 
ties and  places  itself  in  consequence  on  the  ground  of  Inter- 
national Socialism. 

An  Englishman  opposed  the  resolution.  It  was  no 
less  a  person  than  Henry  Mayers  Hyndman,  who  repre- 
sented the  British  Marxian  Socialist  Society,  the  Social 
Democratic  Federation.  He  claimed  that  the  British 
Labor  Party  does  not  take  its  stand  unequivocally  on 
the  class  struggle;  and  that  if  it  was  admitted,  there 
would  be  no  excuse  for  excluding  the  American  Federa- 
tion of  Labor.  [It  might  be  remarked  that  Socialists 
consider  the  American  Federation  of  Labor  as  a  "capi- 
talistic" organization,  for  the  reason  that  it  is  founded 
upon  the  "wage  system."] 

The  Kautsky  resolution  was  adopted  with  substantial 
unanimity.  This  action,  and  other  incidents  recently, 
raise  the  question  whether  Marxian  Socialism  on  the 
Continent  itself  is  not  shedding  its  cast-iron  clothing 
of  strict  Revolutionary  orthodoxy. 

At  the  Conference  of  the  Labor  Party,  held  at  Hull. 
January  20-22,  1908,  the  following  amendment  to  the 
constitution,  with  the  object  of  making  Socialism  spe- 
cifically  the  basis  of  the  party,  was  defeated  by  91,000 
for,   to  951,000  against: 

.  .  .  To  organize  and  maintain  a  Parliamentary  Party, 
with  its  own  whips,  whose  ultimate  object  shall  be  the  obtain- 
ing for  the  workers  the  full  results  of  their  labor  by  the 
rthrow  of  the  present  competitive  system  of  capitalism 
and  the  institution  of  a  system  of  public  ownership  and 
control  of  nil   the  menus  of  life. 


BRITISH    SOCIALISM  251 

l '.nt  at  the  same  Conference  the  following  resolution 
was  adopted  by  a  vote  of  514.000  for,  to  469,000  against : 

That,  in  the  opinion  of  this  Conference,  the  time  has 
arrived  when  the  Labor  Party  should  have  as  a  definite 
object  the  socialization  of  the  means  of  production,  distribu- 
tion, and  exchange,  to  be  controlled  by  a  democratic  State 
in  the  interest  of  the  entire  community  and  the  complete 
emancipation  of  Labor  from  the  domination  of  capitalism  and 
landlordism,  with  the  establishment  of  social  and  economic 
equality  between  the  sexes. 

To  most  people  this  is  a  distinction  without  a  differ- 
ence, as  a  question  of  principle.  The  contradictory 
attitude  of  the  Labor  Party  was  really  nothing  but  a 
supposed  piece  of  "smart''  diplomacy.  It  declined  to 
make  Socialism  one  of  its  specific  constitutional  bases, 
but  it  declared  for  the  "ultimate  aim"  of  Socialism — 
Collectivism. 

At  the  ninth  annual  Congress  of  the  Labor  Party, 
held  at  Portsmouth,  January  27-29,  1909,  it  was  decided 
to  continue  the  rule  against  permitting  candidates  of 
the  Labor  Party  standing  for  Parliament  as  Socialists 
— that  is,  they  must  primarily  stand  as  Labor  candi- 
dates ;  but  this  was  simply  a  matter  of  party  discipline, 
and  the  situation  remains  that  in  a  practical  sense  the 
Parliamentary  candidates  of  the  Labor  Party  are  com- 
mitted to  Socialism. 

As  to  Trade  Unionism  itself,  several  National  Con- 
gresses have  passed  resolutions  of  a  general  Socialist 
nature.  In  1894  the  Congress  at  Norwich  declared  by 
219  to  61,  that  it  was  "essential  for  the  maintenance  of 
British  industries  to  nationalize  the  land  and  all  the 
means  of  production  and  exchange ;"  and  on  a  number 
of   subsequent    occasions   resolutions   have   been    passed 


252  WHAT   IS    SOCIALISM? 

-    ■*""    *'■     <    '      -  WM  ••'--■-     '  '     '-*^y 

by  Trade  Union  Congresses  in  favor  of  the  nationaliza- 
tion of  land,  mines,  and  railways. 

In  the  International  Socialist  Review  (Chicago),  of 
October,  1909,  H.  M.  Hyndman,  the  founder  and  still 
the  leading  spirit  of  the  Marxian  Social  Democratic 
Federation  of  Great  Britain,  had  a  bitter  article  criticis- 
ing the  heterodox  Opportunism  of  the  British  Labor- 
Socialists.  He  agrees  with  M.  Clemenceau,  of  France, 
that  the  English  working  class  is  "a  bourgeois  class," 
and  he  adds : 

It  is  ignorant,  prejudiced,  anxious  to  make  petty  profits 
for  itself,  and  given  over,  in  many  cases,  especially  in  the 
north  of  England  and  Wales,  to  the  most  canting  and  loath- 
some form  of  Religionism.  Consequently,  it  has  accepted 
in  full  the  political  economy  of  its  worst  enemies,  holds 
that  compromise  is  the  highest  wisdom,  never  accepts  any 
definite  principle  with  a  view  to  pushing  it  to  a  conclusion, 
and  believes  that  there  is  no  way  out  of  the  present  miserable 
system,  because  the  governing  classes  say  so. 

As  to  the  Independent  Labor  Party,  our  critic  de- 
clares that  "they  have  been  content  to  accept  with  grati- 
tude just  what  the  Liberals  thought  proper  to  chuck  to 
them,  and  are  now  being  rapidly  absorbed  into  the  capi- 
talist Liberal  Party;"  and  he  concludes  his  diatribe  by 
the  assertion  that  "the  Labor  Party  in  England  to-day 
is  the  greatest  obstacle  to  Socialist  progress  at  home." 

Has  Socialism  Been  Halted? 

In  spite  of  the  apparently  resistless  sweep  of  Social- 
ism over  official  Trade  Unionism,  there  is  a  suspicion 
creeping  into  the  minds  of  even  many  Socialists  that 
the  tide  has  reached  its  height,  at  least,  for  a  time. 
There   were  two  special   reasons    for   the   extraordinary 


BRITISH    SOCIALISM  253 

development  of  Socialism  among  the  Trade  Unionists, 
apart  from  the  general  one  of  the  natural  effect  of  the 
never-ceasing  work  of  propagandism  carried  on  with 
such  masterly  subtlely  by  the  Socialists,  particularly  the 
Fabians.  The  first  was  the  "Taff  Vale  decision,"  in 
1 90 1,  by  which  funds  of  Trade  Unions  could  be  held 
for  damages  in  trade  disputes.  The  Socialists  were 
quick  to  adopt  the  policy  of  fanning  the  deep  resent- 
ment aroused  by  this  decision;  and  the  Trade  Unionists 
got  desperate,  and  were  in  a  humor  to  accept  anything 
which  promised  to  hit  Capitalism  on  the  head.  The 
second  reason  was  the  terribly  bad  times  industrially 
which  had  prevailed  in  England  for  several  years.  But 
some  of  the  most  level-headed  Trade  Unionists  now 
recognize — although  but  few  are  bold  enough  to  pub- 
licly declare  it  (for  organized  Labor  opinion  in  Eng- 
land as  elsewhere  is  inclined  to  be  despotic  and  to  be 
intolerant  of  difference  when  it  has  been  officially  de- 
clared)— that  in  passing  the  Trades  Disputes  Act,  in 
1906,  Parliament  went  as  far  as  public  opinion  would 
stand  by  way  of  granting  special  privileges  to  organized 
Labor.  They  could  see  that  even  though  the  Trade 
Unions  in  their  collective  capacity  at  Labor  Congresses 
might  pass  Socialist  resolutions  (possibly  merely  a 
"pious  opinion,"  as  apologetically  stated  by  some  of  the 
leaders  in  reference  to  the  Hull  declaration  in  favor  of 
Socialism  of  the  Labor  Party,  in  1908),  yet  that  did 
not  necessarily  mean  that  there  had  been  a  further 
growth  of  Socialism  among  the  working  classes  gen- 
erally, in  an  individual  sense.  They  could  not  fail  to 
take  note  of  the  unmistakable  fact  that  the  British  peo- 
ple, irrespective  of  party,  and  to  some  extent  irre- 
spective of  condition,  had  become  alarmed  at  the  spectre 


254  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

of  Socialism  which  had  suddenly  confronted  them,  aris- 
ing from  nobody  knew  where,  except  it  might  be  the 
abyss  of  Revolution  and  Atheism,  and  was  therefore  a 
fiend  incarnate  to  the  average  Britisher.  Heretofore, 
the  Socialists — whether  the  bland  and  suave  Fabian  or 
the  blood-red  and  fiery  Social  Democrat — had  had  the 
controversy  all  their  own  way,  both  in  street-corner 
"spouting"  and  in  penny  pamphlets  and  six-penny  para- 
disaical accounts  of  the  coming  Collective  Common- 
wealth, when  there  will  be  a  minimum  of  work  and  a 
maximum  of  play,  with  everything  given  away  for  noth- 
ing. Now,  for  the  first  time,  organized  opposition  to 
Socialism  began  to  appear.  It  is  true  that  the  Socialist 
papers  "pooh-pooh"  the  opposition,  and  systematically 
tell  how  the  "antis"  are  always  routed  in  argument. 
But,  all  the  same,  the  arguments  against  Socialism  are 
getting  a  hearing.  It  is  beginning  to  be  appreciated 
that  there  is  another  side  to  this  question  of  Socialism. 
In  a  little  time  it  developed  that  there  were  Trade 
Unionists  who  objected  to  being  compelled  to  pay  the 
election  expenses  of  men  for  Parliament  who  stood  for 
things,  politically,  socially  and  economically,  in  which 
they  did  not  believe;  and  the  point  was  raised  that  their 
Trade  Union  was  not  established  nor  did  they  join  it 
for  any  such  purpose.  So  the  courts  were  invoked  to 
t< ■  t  the  question  whether  a  loyal  Trade  Unionist  can 
be  compelled  to  pay  this  political  assessment  if  he  does 
not  want  to  do  so,  without  subjecting  himself  to  the 
alternative  <>f  being  expelled  from  the  Union  and  being 
consigned  to  the  outer  darkness  of  "scabdom,"  which 
in  many  trades  in  England  would  mean  the  deprivation 
of  the  only  way  to  gel  a  living.     The  Courts  have  de- 


BRITISH    SOCIALISM 


255 


cided  against  the  Trade  Unions,  and  a  compromise  has 
been  reached. 

Statistical  returns  show  that  the  Socialist  organiza- 
tions proper  have  not  grown  much  in  membership 
within  recent  years,  but  that  ihe  movement  owes  its 
recent  increased  strength  in  Great  Britain  to  the  "alli- 
ance" with  the  Trade  Unions. 

The  figures  below  are  taken  from  the  "I.  L.  P.  Year 
Book  for  1909,"  and  are  therefore  official.  They  show 
the  growth  of  the  organizations  directly  affiliated  with 
the  Labor  Party;  but  the  figures  do  not  include  half  the 
entire  number  of  British  Trade  Unionists  (particularly 
the  miners)  : 

Trades 
Councils 
and 


Trade  Unions  : 
Member- 
No.  ship.         L.  R.  C. 
1900- 1              41          353,0/0  7 

1901-2  65         455,450  21 

1902-3  127         847.315  49 

1903-4  165         956,025  76 

1904-5  158         885,270  73 

1905-6  158         904496  73 

1906-7  176         975,i82  83 

1907-8  181       1,049,673  92 


3 
2 


Socialist 
Societies : 

Member- 
No.  ship. 
22,861 
13,861 
13,835 
13,775 
I4-730 
16,784 
20,885 
22,267 


2 
2 
2 
2 
2 


Total 
Member- 
ship. 

375,931 
469,311 
861,150 
969,800 
900,000 
921,280 
996,067 
1,071,940 


The  total  membership  for  1906-7  includes  2,271  co- 
operators;  and  for  1907-8  the  total  membership  includes 
473  co-operators. 

It  is  not  possible  to  give  any  reliable  figures  as  to  the 
membership  of  the  Marxian  body,  the  Social  Democratic 
Federation.  The  total  paying  membership  throughout 
the  Kingdom  is  said  to  be  about  10,000.  At  the  annual 
Conference  held   at  Manchester,  in    1908,  it  was  stated 


256  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

that  57  new  branches  had  been  established  during  the 
year.  But  there  are  no  figures  available  showing  how 
many  branches  had  lapsed,  or  how  the  total  membership 
stood  in  comparison  with  former  years.  At  this  Con- 
ference a  resolution  to  re-affiliate  with  the  Labor  Party 
was  negatived. 

It  should  be  clearly  understood  that  the  official  paying 
membership  of  the  Socialist  organizations  only  partly 
represent  the  full  Socialist  vote  at  national  and  local 
elections. 

In  the  Autumn  of  191 1  there  was  held  at  Manchester 
a  Conference  of  the  "Revolutionary"  Marxian  Socialists, 
composed  of  delegates  from  the  Social  Democratic 
Party,  the  newly-formed  "British  Socialist  Party," 
"Clarion"  groups,  and  local  branches  of  the  Indepen- 
dent Labor  Party.  It  was  notable  that  no  Fabian  dele- 
gates were  present.  Steps  were  taken  to  form  one  con- 
solidated Revolutionary  Marxian  Party  in  contradis- 
tinction to  the  Fabians,  "Reformists,"  or  "Opportun- 
ists." This  re-organized  Revolutionary  Marxian  Party 
has  an  enrolled  membership  of  35,000. 

The  Anti-Socialist  Movement. 

For  some  years  there  have  been  in  existence  several 
organizations,  headed  by  members  of  the  House  of 
Lords,  wealthy  "captains  of  industry,"  titled  landlords, 
and  a  few  college  professors,  formed  for  the  purpose  of 
combating  Socialism,  particularly  in  the  field  of  publi- 
cations and  public  addresses.  This  "counter"  movement 
did  not  attract  much  public  attention,  and  it  had  but 
little  influence;  in  fact,  its  existence  very  likely  actually 
aided  the  inward  march  of  Socialism.  But  there  has 
recently  been  started  an  attempt  to  establish  a  real  live, 


BRITISH    SOCIALISM  257 

popular  movement,  by  the  Anti-Socialist  Union  of 
Great  Britain.  The  policy  of  the  Anti- Socialist  Union 
is  summarized  in  the  terms :  to  organize,  to  combat,  to 
educate.  Three  departments  have  been  organized  in  the 
Union,  they  being  the  speakers'  department,  the  publi- 
cation department,  and  the  intelligence  department. 
Not  only  have  the  Socialists  been  distinguished  for  con- 
summate political  and  organizing  ability,  but  for  some 
years  they  have  had  at  their  disposal  a  corps  of  the  most 
adroit  and  persuasive  platform  orators  and  street-cor- 
ner "stumpers"  ever  organized  in  Great  Britain  for  any 
purpose,  not  even  excepting  the  old  Chartist  days.  The 
Anti-Socialist  Union  seem  to  fully  appreciate  this,  and 
efforts  are  being  made  "to  train  a  special  brigade  of 
anti-Socialist  speakers,  capable  of  meeting  and  beating 
the  Socialists  on  their  own  ground."  Every  prospective 
speaker  is  required  to  pass  a  viva  voce  examination  be- 
fore appearing  in  public  as  a  representative  of  the 
Union.  In  their  "alarm  call"  to  arouse  the  interest  of 
the  public,  the  Unions  give  out  that  Socialist  meetings 
are  being  held  at  the  rate  of  two  thousand  a  week  in 
Great  Britain ;  that  the  Independent  Labor  Party  and 
the  Social  Democratic  Federation  have  1,100  branches 
— an  increase  of  350  in  eighteen  months  [this  was  in 
1908]  ;  that  the  Independent  Labor  Party  alone  is  said 
to  spend  about  £75,000  yearly  on  organization  and 
propagandism,  and  it  is  estimated  that  the  total  annual 
expenditure  on  Socialist  organization  and  propaganda 
in  Great  Britain  is  between  £200,000  and  £250,000;  that 
there  are  now  ten  distinct  organizations  actively  en- 
gaged in  propagating  Socialism  in  England,  the  Inde- 
pendent Labor  Party  alone  having  more  than  800 
speakers    and    district   organizers.      But   this    statement 


258  WHAT   IS    SOCIALISM? 

gives  only  a  faint  idea  of  the  activity  of  the  Socialists. 
Each  number  of  the  Clarion,  the  weekly  organ  of  mili- 
tant Socialism,  gives  several  columns  of  advertisements 
of  lectures,  debates,  meetings,  demonstrations,  "socials," 
dances,  services  at  Socialist  Churches  and  Sunday- 
schools,  and  announcements  of  gatherings  and  all  sorts 
of  functions,  literary,  political  and  social,  of  "Clarion 
Scouts,"  "Clarion  Cycling  Clubs,"  etc. ;  and  there  are 
pages  of  matter  descriptive  of  the  doings  of  Socialists, 
male  and  female,  young  and  old.  There  can  be  no  ques- 
tion, after  a  perusal  of  a  copy  of  the  Clarion,  of  the 
absolute  earnestness,  devotion  and  enthusiasm  of  the 
Socialists. 

Within  the  past  year  or  so  several  of  the  old-estab- 
lished anti-Socialist  societies,  which  had  not  been  active 
for  some  time,  have  resumed  their  campaign  against  the 
enemy.  The  principal  one  of  these  organizations  is  the 
London  Municipal  Society,  to  whose  work  is  to  be 
largely  attributed  the  Socialist  rout  at  the  municipal  elec- 
tions of  1907  in  the  metropolis.  The  Municipal  Society 
has  published  two  well-written  and  strong  books  against 
Socialism — The  Case  Against  Socialism  and  Socialism 
in  Local  Government.  Other  anti-Socialist  societies 
which  have  recently  become  active  are :  the  Industrial 
Freedom  League,  the  Liberty  and  Property  Defence 
League,  the  Anti-Socialist  League,  the  Anti-Socialist 
Department  of  the  Liberal-Unionist  Council,  and  the 
British  Constitutional  Association.  Several  of  these 
organizations  have  adopted  the  plan  of  the  Anti-Socialist 
Union  in  maintaining  a  special  department  in  which 
speakers  are  trained  to  meet  the  professional  Socialist 
platform  and  street  orators.  This  anti-Socialist  cam- 
paign has  been  much  strengthened  lately  by  the  grow- 


BRITISH    SOCIALISM  259 

ing  revolt  of  a  not  insignificant  number  of  Trade  Union- 
ists against  their  societies  being  "captured"  by  the  So- 
cialists, and  particularly  against  their  having  been  com- 
pelled to  pay  toward  the  election  expenses  and  the  sala- 
ries of  Socialist  members  of  Parliament,  although  the 
last-named  grievance  has  largely  disappeared  through 
compromise  and  the  law  providing  for  the  payment  of 
members.  One  of  the  most  effective  arguments  used  by 
the  anti-Socialist  speakers  is  that  the  "Socialist  tail" 
wags  the  "Trade  Union  dog" — reference  being  had  to 
the  insignificant  number  of  "definite"  Socialists  in  the 
"alliance"  as  compared  with  the  great  number  of  Trade 
Unionists.  Nevertheless,  it  remains  true  that  the  spirit 
of  Socialism  has  permeated  British  Trade  Unionism; 
although  it  is  by  no  means  unlikely  that  further  ac- 
quaintance with  the  Marxian  philosophy  and  the  logic 
of  hard,  practical  experience  will  in  time  lead  to  a  re- 
alignment or  a  change  of  attitude  in  this  regard.  The 
latest  development  of  the  anti-Socialist  movement  is 
the  organization  of  a  Ladies'  Brigade  of  trained  public 
speakers. 


CHAPTER    XI 

CONTINENTAL  SOCIALISM 

The  Menace  of  Socialism,  by  W.  Lavvler  Wilson,  is 
the  most  scorching  and  one  of  the  strongest  of  recent 
criticisms.  The  author  insists  that  Revolution  and  An- 
archy are  the  soul  and  genius  of  the  movement  through- 
out the  world,  no  matter  in  what  guise  it  may  present 
itself.  The  great  catastrophe  which  he  argues  must 
inevitably  come,  is  imminent,  he  declares ;  and  as  to  its 
chief  theatre  of  action,  he  says : 

The  menace  of  Socialism — whether  it  takes  the  form  of 
insurrectionary  violence,  or  the  gradual  corruption  of  society 
through  the  undermining  of  its  base  in  private  property — 
is  virtually  the  same  for  the  United  States,  Canada,  or  Aus- 
stralia,  as  for  England  or  Germany.  But  Europe  is  the 
principal  field  of  action,  because  it  is  the  strategic  centre  of 
the  Class  War.  In  Europe  the  chief  scenes  in  the  great 
drama  of  the  proletarian  movement  have  been  acted ;  in 
Europe  the  decisive  conflict  will  be  fought. 

In  Germany. 

While  the  ultimate  goal  of  Socialism  is  declared  to 
be  internationally  identical,  yet  the  developments  and 
the  practical  expressions  and  methods  of  the  operations 
of  the  Socialist  idea  differ  in  different  countries.  There 
is,  indeed,  a  gradual  modification  going  on — perhaps  to 
some  extent  unconsciously — among  Socialists  in  the 
very  conception  of  Socialism;  and  nowhere  is  this  pro- 

260 


CONTINENTAL   SOCIALISM  261 

cess  of  modification,  both  as  to  theory  and  practice, 
more  marked  within  the  last  few  years  than  in  Ger- 
many, the  classic  home  of  Marxian  Socialism.  The 
popular  belief  that  Modern  Socialism  originated  in  Ger- 
many is  an  error;  but  Germany  has  led  all  other  coun- 
tries in  the  growth  of  the  Socialist  philosophy  among 
the  masses,  although  within  the  last  half-dozen  years 
Kngland  has  leaped  to  the  front.  All  informed  students 
of  modern  history,  non-Socialists  as  much  as  Socialists, 
will  agree  with  the  learned  and  thoughtful  English 
expounder  of  the  movement,  Thomas  Kirkup  (History 
of  Socialism)  that  the  "Social  Democratic  movement  in 
Germany  is  one  of  the  most  notable  phenomena  of  our 
time." 

Although  the  optimistic  expectations  of  Engels  as  to 
the  early  overthrow  of  Capitalism  and  of  the  present 
State  in  Germany  have  not  been  justified,  yet  the  growth 
of  the  Socialist  vote  in  Germany  is  the  most  marvellous 
instance  of  the  development  of  a  political  party  in  his- 
tory, not  even  excepting  the  Republican  Party  in  the 
Tnited  States,  in  which  case  there  were  influences  fa- 
voring it  which  cannot  be  called  political,  properly 
speaking.  The  following  table  shows  the  increase  of 
the  Socialist  vote  in  Germany : 

1867  3°>oo°; 

1877  493>°°°; 

1887  763.o°°; 

1892  1,876,000 ; 

1897  2,107,000; 

1903  3,010,000 ; 

1907  3,259,000; 

1912  4,000,000. 


262  WHAT   IS    SOCIALISM? 

At  the  general  election  of  1907,  the  Socialists  'polled 
almost  one-quarter  of  the  total  vote,  and  numerically 
they  are  now  the  most  important  political  party  in  the' 
Empire.  In  1903,  polling  3,010,771  votes,  the  Social 
Democrats  secured  a  representation  of  82  in  the  Reich- 
stag (Imperial  Parliament).  In  1907  the  vote  was 
3,258,961 — an  increase  of  a  quarter  of  a  million  of 
votes ;  but  the  Socialist  representation  in  the  Reichstag 
was  only  43 — a  loss  of  39  seats,  as  compared  with  1903, 
which  is  to  be  accounted  for  partly  because  of  the  pecu- 
liar combination  of  the  opposing  forces,  but  principally 
because  of  the  operation  of  the  Imperial  Constitution, 
which  militates  against  representation  from  the  cities 
as  compared  with  the  country  districts,  according  to 
population — and  the  Socialist  vote  is  naturally  mostly 
in  the  cities.  The  unfairness  of  this  Constitutional  pro- 
vision is  seen  in  the  fact  that,  although  the  Roman 
Catholics  (who  form  a  separate  group  called  the  "Cen- 
tre") polled,  in  1907,  1,075,680  less  votes  than  the  So- 
cialists, they  had  105  representatives — 62  in  excess  of 
the  Socialists ;  and  the  Conservatives,  who  polled  less 
than  one-third  as  many  votes  as  the  Socialists,  secured 
nearly  twice  as  many  seats.  In  1907  there  were  about 
2,000  Socialists  elected  Mayors  or  members  of  Com- 
munal or  other  Councils,  although,  speaking  generally 
these  local  elections  are  not  on  a  democratic  basis. 
There  are  160  Socialist  papers  published  in  Germany, 
78  of  them  being  dailies,  with  a  combined  circulation 
of  1,160,000  in  1910,  double  that  in  1904.  A  Socialist 
paper  for  women  has  a  circulation  of  85.000. 

Incomplete    returns   received   at   this   writing   indicate 
that  in  the  General  Elections  of  January,  1912,  the  So- 


CONTINENTAL   SOCIALISM  263 

cialists  elected — including  second  ballotings — about   no 
members,  and  cast  about  4,000,000  votes. 

The  beginnings  of  German  Socialism  are  associated 
with  the  names  of  Johann  Gottlieb  Fichte  (born  1762, 
died  1814),  and  Georg  Wilhelm  Friedrich  Hegel  (born 
1770,  died  1831).  Fichte  was  a  follower  of  Kant  and 
advocated  the  State  regulation  of  the  production  and 
distribution  of  goods.  In  one  of  his  works  (Materials 
for  the  Justification  of  the  French  Revolution)  he  says: 
"Property  can  have  no  other  origin  than  labor.  Who- 
soever does  not  work  has  no  right  to  obtain  the  means 
of  existence  from  society."  Hegel  has  been  called  "the 
intellectual  father  of  Karl  Marx  and  of  most  of  the 
early  German  Socialists."  The  latter  admittedly  drew 
most  of  their  ideas  from  England ;  but  the  following 
men  stand  out  prominently  in  the  beginnings  of  German 
Socialism   anterior   to   the   present   organization : 

Heinrich  Ludwig  Lampert  Gall  (born  1790,  died 
1863).  He  is  sometimes  called  the  "first  German  So- 
cialist." He  founded  a  reformatory  colony  in  America 
(near  Harrisburg,  Pa.),  composed  of  thieves,  har- 
lots and  convicts !  Of  course,  it  was  a  failure.  Then 
he  endeavored  to  form  an  international  movement 
jointly  with  Robert  Owen,  of  England,  and  Fourier  and 
Saint-Simon,  of  France;  and  in  1835  he  wrote  a  work 
in  which  the  principles  of  Modern  Socialism  were  out- 
lined. 

Victor  Aime  Huber  (born  1800.  died  1869).  He  was 
the  founder  of  German  Christian  Socialism,  and  was  a 
strong  advocate  of  Co-operation. 

Johann  Karl  Rodbertus  (born  1805,  died  1875). 
Some  authorities  claim  that  he  was  a  greater  Socialist 


264  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

than  even  Karl  Marx.  Prof.  Adolf  Wagner  (a  leading 
"Socialist  of  the  Chair"  and  Christian  Socialist)  de- 
scribed Rodbertus  as  "the  first,  the  most  original,  and 
the  boldest  representative  of  Scientific  Socialism  in  Ger- 
many." Rodbertus  frankly  acknowledged  his  indebted- 
ness to  Adam  Smith  and  Ricardo,  the  English  econo- 
mists. According  to  Rodbertus,  rent  is  that  income 
which  is  derived  by  virtue  of  a  possession,  and  without 
labor;  and  there  is  rent  from  both  land  and  capital.  He 
proposed  to  abolish  the  present  wage-system  by  sub- 
stituting a  "normal"  work-day,  with  a  normal  form  of 
wages.  He  did  not  believe  in  the  State  limiting  the 
hours  of  labor,  his  theory  being  that  that  was  an  un- 
justifiable interference  with  personal  liberty,  and  that 
the  increase  of  wages  would  regulate  that  matter. 

Wilhelm  Weitling  (born  1808,  died  1874).  He  was 
an  "Utopian"  Socialist,  and  claimed  that  he  was  con- 
verted to  Socialism  by  reading  the  New  Testament, 
although  he  seems  to  also  have  imbibed  the  theories  of 
the  French  Commune.  He  came  to  America  in  1847; 
returned  to  Germany  at  the  Revolution  of  1848;  and 
afterwards  came  back  to  America  and  founded  a  So- 
cialist society  called  the  "Arbeiterbund ;"  he  was  also 
interested  in  a  Socialist  colony  in  Wisconsin.  His  ideal 
form  of  Utopian  Socialism  was  a  federation  of  the  fami- 
lies of  the  world,  with  a  communistic  distribution  of  the 
products,  an  extra  share  of  the  luxuries  being  given  to 
those  who  produced  more  than  the  average.  One  writer 
described  him  as  "the  connecting  link  between  present- 
day  Socialism  and  its  earlier  forms."  He  was  the  first 
Socialist  (at  least,  in  Germany)  to  make  an  appeal 
especially  t<>  workingmen  to  support  Socialism. 

Hillquil  says  that  the  present-day  Socialist  movement 


CONTINENTAL    SOCIALISM  265 

in  Germany  runs  in  an  unbroken  chain  from  the  days 
of  Ferdinand  Lassalle  (born  1825,  died  1864).  Heine 
called  Lassalle  "the  Messiah  of  the  nineteenth  century  ;" 
and  among  the  people  he  was  known  as  the  "father  of 
Social  Democracy."  In  his  youthful  days  Lassalle  was  a 
revolutionist,  and  he  was  in  prison  for  six  months  for 
participation  in  the  troubles  of  1848;  but  later  he  grew 
to  be  conservative.  Like  the  "Master,"  Marx,  and  so 
many  other  brilliant  lights  in  the  economic  and  especially 
in  the  Socialist  firmament,  he  was  a  Jew.  "The  birth- 
day of  German  Socialism"  is  often  the  name  given  to 
the  date  April  12,  1862,  when  Lassalle  lectured  before 
an  Artisans'  Association,  at  Berlin ;  and  for  this  speech 
he  was  arrested  and  fined.  The  Leipsic  Workingmen's 
Association  invited  him  to  define  a  policy  for  them,  as 
they  were  uncertain  what  attitude  to  adopt  with  regard 
to  Co-operation ;  and  in  reply  Lassalle  wrote  them  an 
"Open  Letter,"  which  is  called  "the  Charter  of  German 
Socialism,"  in  which  he  advocated  the  formation  of  Co- 
operative societies  with  State  aid.  He  had  a  genius 
for  organization,  and  he  took  an  active  part  in  form- 
ing, on  May  23,  1863,  the  Universal  German  Working- 
man's  Association,  which  afterwards  became  an  integral 
part  of  the  present  Social  Democratic  Party.  While, 
of  course,  the  name  of  Marx  holds  supreme  in  Ger- 
many, as  elsewhere,  as  the  great  philosophical  founder 
of  Modern  Socialism,  yet  that  of  Lassalle  stands  first 
in  Germany  as  the  actual  originator  of  the  present 
movement  in  that  country.  After  having  studied  the 
question  from  the  Hegelian  point  of  view,  Lassalle 
learned  his  first  lesson  in  Revolutionary  Socialism  at 
Paris,  which  at  that  time  was  the  centre  of  attraction 
for  Radicals  of  all  nationalities.     His  relations  with  the 


266  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

Countess  Hatzfeldt  "did  not,"  as  Kirkup  so  guardedly 
puts  it,  "tend  to  improve  Lassalle's  position  in  German 
society.  Rightly  or  wrongly,  people  had  an  unfavora- 
ble impression  of  him,  as  of  an  adventurer.  .  .  .  His 
conduct  was  a  mixture  of  chivalry  and  business,  which 
every  one  must  judge  for  himself.  It  was  certainly  not 
in  accordance  with  the  conventionalities,  but  for  these 
Lassalle  never  entertained  much  respect."  Kirkup  says 
that  Lassalle's  Socialism  is  similar  to  that  of  Rodbertus 
and  Karl  Marx,  without  Lassalle  being  a  disciple  of 
either  of  them,  he  having  his  own  way  of  conceiving  and 
expressing  historic  Socialism.  His  "Iron  Law  of 
Wages"  is  the  most  distinctive  feature  of  his  Socialism. 
"It  holds  the  same  prominent  place  in  his  system  of 
thinking  as  the  theory  of  surplus  value  does  in  that  of 
Marx.  Both,  it  may  be  added,  are  only  different  aspects 
of  the  same  fact."  Lassalle  described  as  follows  (in 
part)  this  "Law"  in  the  "Open  Letter"  above  referred 
to:  "The  Iron  Economic  Law,  which,  in  existing  cir- 
cumstances, under  the  law  of  supply  and  demand  for 
labor,  determines  the  wage,  is  this :  that  the  average 
wage  always  remains  reduced  to  the  necessary  pro- 
vision which,  according  to  the  customary  standard  of 
living,  is  required  for  subsistence  and  for  propagation." 
Further  on  he  says :  "From  the  produce  of  labor  so 
much  is  taken  and  distributed  among  the  workmen  as  is 
required  for  their  subsistence.  The  entire  surplus  of 
production  falls  to  the  capitalist.  It  is  therefore  a  result 
of  the  Iron  Law  that  the  workman  is  necessarily  ex- 
eluded  from  the  benefits  <>f  an  increasing  production, 
from  the  increased  productivity  of  his  own  labor."  Las- 
salle does  not  claim  to  have  been  the  discoverer  of  this 
"Iron    law,"   but   he  acknowledges  that  he   accepted  it 


CONTINENTAL   SOCIALISM  267 

as  taught  by  Ricardo  and  other  economists  of  England, 
as  well  as  of  France  and  Germany.  This  theory,  how- 
ever, is  not  now  generally  accepted  even  by  Socialist s. 
Kirkup  himself  (who  is  an  avowed  but  a  discriminating 
Socialist),  says  that  Lassalle's  theory  is  "inaccurate  and 
untenable;"  John  Spargo  (who  is  more  of  a  Marxian 
than  is  Kirkup)  ridicules  Lassalle's  "Iron  Law."  He 
says  "there  is  no  such  thing."  Lassalle  acknowledged 
that  the  "Iron  Law"  was  the  keystone  of  his  system,  and 
that  his  doctrines  stood  or  fell  with  it.  The  non-So- 
cialist view  is  strongly  put  by  Prof.  Flint,  in  his  analyti- 
cal work.  Socialism:  "Lassalle's  exaggeration  of  Ri- 
cardo's  conclusion  is  a  gross  caricature  of  the  real  law, 
devoid  of  theoretical  justification,  and  decisively  contra- 
dicted by  the  history  of  wages.  The  law  of  wages 
tends  to  press  us  down  to  bare  subsistence  not  otherwise 
than  water  tends  to  drown  us."  Prof.  Ely  says  that 
Lassalle's  writings  did  not  advance  materially  the  theory 
of  social  democracy,  but  he  clothed  the  thoughts  of 
Rodbertus  and  Marx  "in  such  manner  as  to  enable 
ordinary  laborers  to  understand  them,  and  this  they 
never  could  have  done  without  such  help.  Even  for  an 
educated  man  their  works  are  not  easy  reading;  for  the 
uneducated  they  are  quite  incomprehensible."  Hillquit 
gives  this  high  estimate  (Socialism  in  Theory  and  Prac- 
tice) :  "Of  extraordinary  eloquence,  profound  learning 
and  indomitable  energy,  Lassalle  was  probably  the  most 
powerful  popular  tribune  produced  by  the  nineteenth 
century."  It  is  a  remarkable  fact  that  Lassalle  had 
the  friendship  of  Bismarck. 

In  1869  a  new  Socialist  party,  more  strictly  Marxian, 
was  formed,  principally  through  the  efforts  of  YYilhelm 
Liebknecht  and  August  Bebel.     There  was  a   feud  be- 


268  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

twecn  the  different  Socialist  organizations,  which  was 
terminated  in  1875  by  their  amalgamation  at  the  famous 
Gotha  Convention,  and  the  present  Social  Democratic 
Party  was  formed ;  and  Liebknecht  and  Bebel  became 
the  permanent  leaders.  After  being  imprisoned  because 
of  participation  in  the  revolution  of  1848  Liebknecht 
fled  to  England,  where  he  became  a  friend  of  Marx, 
whose  views  he  espoused.  Upon  returning  to  Germany 
he  joined  Lassalle's  agitation,  and  became  leader  of  the 
International  movement ;  and  he  was  again  imprisoned 
several  times. 

Bebel  has  been  for  many  years  the  leading  Socialist 
in  the  Reichstag ;  he,  also,  has  been  imprisoned.  He 
may  be  considered  the  greatest  living  German  Socialist 
— and,  indeed,  in  the  world — and  his  speeches  are  much 
quoted.  During  the  Commune  in  Paris  in  1871  Bebel 
made  a  speech  in  the  Reichstag,  in  which  was  the  fol- 
lowing passage: 

Be  assured  that  the  entire  European  proletariat,  and  all 
that  have  a  feeling  for  freedom  and  independence  in  their 
heart,  have  their  eyes  fixed  on  Paris.  And  if  Paris  is  for 
the  present  crushed,  I  remind  you  that  the  struggle  in  Paris 
is  only  a  small  affair  of  outposts,  that  the  main  conflict  in 
Europe  is  still  before  us,  and  that  ere  many  decades  pass 
away  the  battle-cry  of  the  Parisian  proletariat,  war  to  the 
palace,  peace  to  the  cottage,  death  to  want  and  idleness, 
will  be  the   battle-cry   of  the   entire   European  proletariat. 

The  German  authorities  have  never  forgiven  Bebel 
for  this  speech. 

Modification  of  German  Socialism. 

It  is  a  curious  fact  that  when  the  Social  Democratic 
Party  was  organized  in  1875  it  made  a  declaration,  in 


CONTINENTAL   SOCIALISM  269 

what  has  got  to  be  known  as  "the  Gotha  Programme," 
which  has  been  widely  accepted  as  "Marxian"  in  both 
America  and  England,  but  which,  as  a  matter  of  fact, 
was  adopted — under  pressure  from  Lassalle — in  spite 
of  the  vehement  protest  of  Marx.  The  declaration 
referred  to  is  that  "Labor  is  the  source  of  all  wealth 
and  civilization."  This  assertion  is  now  admitted  by  all 
the  leading  Socialists  who  understand  economics  to  be 
wrong,  and  the  sentence  has  been  modified  in  nearly  all 
authoritative  Socialist  declarations,  although  it  is  still 
made  to  do  service  in  the  hands  of  some  of  the  lesser 
responsible  writers  and  speakers,  in  Socialist  news- 
papers, pamphlets,  etc..  and  by  street-corner  haranguers, 
and  in  fact  is  still  held  as  sound  Socialism  by  the  great 
proletariat.  Spargo  is  very  indignant  that  critics  should 
make  "misrepesentations"  as  to  this  point.  He  says : 
"A  draft  [of  the  Programme]  was  submitted  to  Marx 
and  he  wrote  of  it  that  it  was  'utterly  condemnable  and 
demoralizing  to  the  party.'  Of  the  passage  in  question, 
he  wrote :  'Labor  is  not  the  source  of  all  wealth.  Nature 
is  just  as  much  the  source  of  use- values  (and  of  such,  to 
be  sure,  is  material  wealth  composed)  as  is  Labor,  which 
itself  is  but  the  expression  of  a  natural  force,  of  human 
labor-power.'  '  Nevertheless,  the  declaration  as  ob- 
jected to  by  Marx  stood  at  the  head  of  the  programme 
of  the  German  Social  Democracy  for  many  years. 

The  same  paragraph  of  the  Programme  contained  an- 
other declaration  around  which  there  has  waged  a  warm 
warfare  between  different  schools  of  German  and  Eng- 
lish Socialists,  it  being  to  the  effect  that  the  division  of 
the  products  of  Labor  "belongs  by  an  equal  right  to  all 
its  members,  each  according  to  his  reasonable  needs." 
There  is  much  dispute  as  to  whether  true  Marxian  Social- 


270  WHAT   IS    SOCIALISM? 

ism  should  not  read  "deeds'  instead  of  "needs."  Most 
of  the  ''persuasive"  sort  of  Socialists,  anticipating  the 
criticism  which  attaches  to  the  Communistic  needs,  are 
careful  to  explain  that  under  Socialism  rewards  will  be 
given  and  supplies  furnished  according  to  deeds.  But, 
there  is  ample  warrant  for  the  statement  that  the  trend 
of  intellectual  thorough-going  Revolutionary-Socialism, 
English  and  American  as  well  as  German,  is  in  the  direc- 
tion of  doling  out  supplies  according  to  needs;  indeed, 
not  to  be  Communistic  in  this  regard,  would,  according 
to  some  Socialists,  have  the  effect  of  creating  "classes" 
under  Socialism. 

These  declarations  of  the  Gotha  Programme  have  been 
such  bones  of  contention  not  only  between  anti-Socialists 
and  Socialists,  but  among  Socialists  themselves,  that  the 
entire  paragraph  is  here  given: 

I.  Labor  is  the  source  'of  all  wealth  and  civilization,  and 
since  productive  labor  as  a  whole  is  made  possible  only  in 
and  through  society,  the  entire  produce  of  labor  belongs 
to  society ;  that  is,  it  belongs  by  an  equal  right  to  all  its 
members,  each  according  to  his  reasonable  needs,  upon  con- 
dition of  a  universal  obligation  to  labor. 

In  1878  attempts  on  the  life  of  the  Emperor  were  made 
by  Socialists,  and  Bismarck  applied  coercive  measures. 
LJp  to  a  certain  point  these  measures  appear  to  have  been 
•  uccessful  in  repressing  Socialism,  and  it  is  not  unlikely 
that  they  prevented  a  rebellion.  But  Bismarck  extended 
coercion  beyond  a  reasonable  time,  and  the  natural  result 
followed.  Socialism,  after  a  period  of  disorganization, 
arose  stronger  than  ever,  and  in  1890  it  polled  1,427,000 
votes,  and  thus  became  the  strongest  single  party  in  the 
Empire.     But   while   the   Socialist  vote   was   increasing, 


CONTINENTAL   SOCIALISM  271 

and  has  been  increasing  ever  since,  there  has  been  a  proc- 
ess of  not  only  a  change  in  tactics  but  of  a  modification 
of  theories  going  on.  The  truth  is  that  strict  Marxian 
Socialism  has  not  been  able  to  stand  against  the  streams 
of  criticism  which  have  been  turned  upon  it  in  Germany, 
and  which  have  only  within  recent  years  been  active  in 
England  and  America;  and  these  streams  did  not  all  have 
anti-Socialist  sources.  In  Germany  the  gradual  shedding 
of  the  Marxian  shell  has  come  about  through  the  opera- 
tion of  a  stupendous  and  ponderous  course  of  philosoph- 
ical reasoning ;  in  England  the  "Fabianization"  of  Social- 
ism has  come  about  in  a  natural  and  characteristic  way, 
simply  by  the  operation  of  the  national  spirit  of  Compro- 
mise and  Opportunism. 

The  first  problem  as  to  tactics  which  confronted  the 
Social  Democracy  of  Germany  was  in  regard  to  the  atti- 
tude it  should  adopt  towards  Bismarck's  State  Socialism, 
which  is  often  denounced  by  Socialists  in  the  Fatherland 
as  "State  Capitalism."  [State  and  Municipal  Socialism 
is  treated  of  in  a  separate  chapter.] 

Of  recent  years  the  tendency  in  Germany  has  been  to 
drift  away  from  the  strict -doctrinaire  Revolutionary  So- 
cialism, and  to  adopt  a  policy  of  Opportunism,  although 
the  legions  of  Bebel  and  Kautsky  still  declare  for  Col- 
lectivism, to  come  about  by  the  "class-conscious"  strug- 
gle of  the  proletariat.  There  is  a  faction  among  the 
German  Socialists  who  are  revolutionary  to  the  extent  of 
being  Anarchistic,  and  they  object  to  the  Opportunist  tac- 
tics and  to  the  "parliamenting"  of  present-day  Socialism. 
Some  of  these  malcontents  were  expelled  from  the  Social 
Democratic  Party ;  they  endeavored  to  form  a  new  party, 
the  Union  of  Independent  Socialists,  but  they  have  not 
been   able  to  enroll   many   members,   although  no  doubt 


272  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

there  is  great  dissatisfaction  with  the  present  policy  of  the 
Social  Democratic  Party. 

In  1891  Engels  published  for  the  first  time  the  "Mar- 
ginal Notes"  of  Marx  on  the  Gotha  Programme.  The 
criticisms  contained  therein  caused  some  embarrassment 
to  the  official  leaders  of  the  Social  Democratic  Party  and 
to  the  Socialist  members  of  the  Reichstag ;  and  it  is  said 
that  it  was  owing  to  these  criticisms  of  Marx  which 
caused  a  revision  of  the  platform,  at  Erfurt,  October  14- 
20,  1 89 1.  It  is  claimed  that  the  Erfurt  platform  was  a 
victory  of  Marxism  over  the  principles  of  Lassalle ;  but 
the  ascendency  of  Marxism  did  not  last  long  unchal- 
lenged. The  critics  of  Marxism  were  headed  by  George 
von  Vollmar  and  E.  Bernstein  ;  their  school  is  known  as 
the  "Revisionist"  or  Evolutionary  wing,  and  their  posi- 
tion with  regard  to  State  Socialism  and  ameliorative 
measures  is  similar  to  that  taken  by  the  English  Fabians. 
To  harmonize  the  differences,  and  to  present  a  united 
front  to  their  critics  on  the  outside,  the  Social  Democratic 
Party  in  1892  passed  a  resolution  which,  while  it  repudi- 
ated State  Socialism  by  name,  accepted  it  in  fact  as 
"some  trilling  part  payment."  Bernstein  went  further 
than  Vollman,  and  took  issue  with  the  fundamental  doc- 
trines laid  down  by  Marx  and  Engels,  not  only  with  re- 
gard to  "the  materialistic  theory  of  history,"  but  also  as 
to  the  great  "kladderadatsch" — the  cataclysm  which  is  to 
destroy  the  present  social  and  industrial  system  and  bring 
in  the  Collective  Commonwealth.  Arrayed  against  Voll- 
mar and  Bernstein  were  Liebknecht,  Bebel  and  Kautsky. 
The  agreement  made  between  the  different  schools  of 
German  Socialism  is  a  sort  of  patch-work  arrangement: 
one  pronouncement  is  for  a  straight-out,  uncompromis- 
ing "class-conscious"   Revolutionary  Socialism,  while  an 


CONTINENTAL    SOCIALISM  273 

accompanying  one  is  practically  for  Fabian  (  )pportunism ; 
and  the  subsequent  developments  are  increasingly  in  the 

latter  direction. 

One  wing  of  the  Social  I  )emocracy  opposed  am  par- 
ticipation in  elections,  holding  that  the  act  of  voting  was 
a  submission  by  the  proletariat  to  the  existing  capitalistic 
regime ;  another  wing  tolerated  participation  in  elections 
simply  as  a  means  of  agitation  for  the  purpose  of  educat- 
ing the  workingmen  in  the  principles  of  Socialism,  but 
this  wing  opposed  participation  in  Parliamentary  activi- 
ties; another  wing  favored  political  alliances  with  other 
Parliamentary  groups  or  political  parties,  with  the  view 
of  securing  a  particular  ohject,  and  these  compromisers 
were  denounced  as  traitors  to  true  Socialism.  In  the 
wordy  discussions  which  took  place  over  these  differ- 
ences, particularly  in  regard  to  Trade  Unions  and  Co- 
operation, it  became  manifest  that  the  opposition  to  these 
rival  movements  arose  largely  from  the  fear  that  they 
would  bring  about  such  an  improved  condition  among  the 
working  people  that  they  would  lose  their  interest  in  the 
theories  of  Socialism.  This  was  also  the  case  in  Emr- 
land. 

On  all  these  points  of  difference  there  have  been  modi- 
fications— and  in  some  respects  an  actual  transformation 
— of  the  original  position  taken  by  the  German  Social 
Democratic  Party ;  and  now  it  no  longer  holds  good  that 
the  Social  Democracy  is  a  strictly  orthodox  Marxian 
party.  Still,  it  clings  to  the  "class-conscious"  formula, 
and  especially  to  the  "ultimate  aim" — the  common  owner- 
ship of  the  means  of  production  and  the  social  organiza- 
tion of  production  and  exchange  ;  and  as  an  organization 
the  Social  Democracy  isolates  itself  from  other  political 
parties. 


274  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

Collectivism,  by  Paul  Leroy  Beaulieu,  is  placed  (at 
least  by  non-Socialists)  at  the  front  of  recent  masterly 
criticisms  of  Marxian  Socialism.  In  that  work  Beaulieu 
presents  a  summary  and  analysis  of  Bernstein's  argument 
against  Collectivism,  comparing  it  with  that  made  by 
Jean  Leon  Jaures,  the  leader  of  the  present  reorganized 
French  Socialists ;  and  he  proceeds :  "  -  .  .  .  Jaures 
himself  has  abandoned,  on  more  than  one  point,  the  theo- 
ries of  Marx,  and  has  recognized  the  falsity  of  his 
prophecies.  Kautsky,  in  Germany,  and  still  more, 
Guesde,  in  France,  are,  exclusive  of  the  aged  Bebel,  al- 
most the  only  avowed  upholders  of  unadulterated  Marx- 
ism at  the  present  time."  Beaulieu  considers  that  by 
Bernstein's  "destructive  criticism"  of  the  Marxian  doc- 
trine "  'Scientific  Socialism'  is  finally  destroyed,  and  the 
idol  before  which  two  generations  have  prostrated  them- 
selves vanishes  and  leaves  no  trace." 

The  controversy  between  the  two  schools  of  German 
Socialism  was  very  bitter  in  1910,  and  for  the  time  being 
caused  a  rupture. 

The  organization  of  Social  Democratic  women  is  ad- 
vancing by  leaps  and  bounds  in  Germany.  It  com- 
menced in  1906;  in  1909  there  were  62,000  enrollments; 
in  1911  there  were  100,000. 

In  May,  1910,  there  was  a  law  passed  controlling  the 
potash  trade,  which  a  writer  in  the  Atlantic  Monthly 
(July,  1911)  declares  "goes  further  in  the  direction  of 
Socialism  than  any  previous  legislation  in  Germany." 
Incidentally  this  law  has  been  the  subject  of  diplomatic 
exchanges  between  Washington  and  Berlin,  a  claim  hav- 
ing been  set  tip  by  some  American  concessionaires  that 
the  law  amounted  to  a  repudiation  of  contracts.  This 
law  assigns  to  each  potash  mine  a  certain  percentage  of 


CONTINENTAL    SOCIALISM  275 

the  total  product  of  the  country,  and  lays  a  prohibitory 
tax  upon  what  it  produces  in  excess  of  that  allotment. 
It  fixes  the  maximum  price  for  the  home  market  and 
prohibits  selling  abroad  at  a  lower  price.  Wages  cannot 
be  reduced  without  the  consent  of  the  employees — other- 
wise the  allotment  of  output  is  restricted. 

The  writer  in  the  Atlantic  Monthly  observes  that  in 
Germany  "the  individual  withers,"  and  the  State  is 
"more  and  more." 

French  Socialism. 

While,  to  the  Anglo-American  mind,  German  Social- 
ism is  generally  associated  with  philosophical  profundity. 
French  Socialism  is  nearly  always  associated  with  vio- 
lence and  bloodshed.  And  yet,  France  shares  with  Eng- 
land the  distinction  of  being  the  birth-place  of  the  Philo- 
sophical, the  Utopian,  and  the  Christian  phases  of  Social- 
ism. Kirkup,  in  An  Enquiry  into  Socialism,  notes  that 
John  Stuart  Mill  has  narrated  in  his  autobiography  how 
the  growth  of  his  opinions  was  affectc.i  by  the  discus- 
sions of  French  Socialism.  Before  1848  Paris  was  the 
centre  of  Socialist  and  revolutionary  ideas.  In  the  mid- 
dle of  the  1 8th  century  was  a  French  economist  named 
Morelly  (or  Morelli  or  Morellet),  whose  writings  were 
influential  in  forming  the  theories  of  the  French  Revolu- 
tion ;  and  his  ideas  were  for  a  time  mistakenly  attributed 
to  Diderot.  Morelly's  Code  of  Nature  was  the  inspira- 
tion of  the  Socialism  of  Francois  Noel  Babeuf  (born 
1764.  guillotined  in  May,  1797).  self-styled  Cuius  Grac- 
chus. Victor  Cathrein,  the  Jesuit  critic  of  Socialism, 
says  in  his  standard  Catholic  work,  that  Babeuf  was  "the 
first  to  raise  the  standard  of  modern  Socialism."  Ac- 
cording to  Babeuf's  theory  of  Communism  "the  aim  of 


276  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

society  is  the  happiness  of  all,  and  happiness  consists  in 
equality."  How  Babeuf  influenced  the  thought  of  his 
times  can  be  seen  by  the  fact  that  the  French  Constitu- 
tion of  1793  declared:  "All  men  are  equal  by  nature;" 
and  "the  purpose  of  Society  is  universal  happiness." 
The  basis  of  Babeuf's  system  was  equality,  and  to  realize 
this  equality  he  formulated  the  following  demands — and 
it  will  be  observed  how  Babeuf  anticipated  later  Social- 
ists :  Every  one  was  to  be  obliged  to  work ;  the  time  of 
work  was  to  be  determined  by  law  ;  production  was  to 
be  regulated  by  a  supreme  committee  elected  by  the  peo- 
ple ;  necessary  work  was  to  be  allotted  to  the  citizens  ; 
disagreeable  jobs  were  to  be  performed  in  turn  by  every 
citizen  ;  each  citizen  was  to  have  a  right  to  all  commodi- 
ties, which  were  to  be  distributed  according  to  his  needs. 
Truly  does  Cathrein  remark :  "At  bottom  Babeuf's  de- 
mands are  identical  with  those  formulated  by  Bebel  and 
other  modern  Socialists." 

[The  Socialism  of  the  French  Utopians,  Cabet,  Saint- 
Simon  and  Fourier,  is  treated  of  elsewhere  in  this  vol- 
ume.] 

Utopianism  was  followed  by  political  Socialism,  and 
the  name  of  Louis  Diane  (horn  181 1,  died  1882)  comes 
11])  as  that  of  "the  first  State  Socialist."  To  this  day 
there  is  disagreement  as  to  whether  the  French  Govern- 
ment was  responsible  for  the  failure  of  Louis  Blanc's 
"National  Workshops."  Blanc  and  his  party  advocated 
the  droit  an  travail — the  right  of  laborers  to  demand 
work  from  the  government  it"  they  could  not  find  it  else- 
where. Such  an  authority  .is  Prof.  Ely,  in  French  and 
German  Socialism,  asserts  thai  official  documents  prove 
th.it  the  real  purpose  of  the-  French  Ministers  in  making 
a  pretext  of  carrying  out  the  droit  an  travail  by  the  erec- 


CONTINENTAL    SOCIALISM  277 

tion  (it'  ateliers  sociaux  (social  workshops)  was  to  dis- 
credit Louis  Blanc  and  cause  the  scheme  to  fail,  and  thus 
to  demonstrate  its  impracticability.  But  there  is  incon- 
trovertible testimony  that  the  scheme  was  inherently 
wildly  impracticable.  That  it  was  a  tragic  failure  is  a 
matter  of  history,  and  its  aftermath  was  a  bloody  drama  ; 
the  frenzied  disappointed  unemployed  broke  out  in  a 
saturnalia  of  insurrection,  and  3,000  were  killed  in  the 
fighting  against  the  government  forces,  and  over  3,000 
were  transported  to  Algeria. 

The  great  figure  in  French  Socialism  next  to  Blanc  is 
that  of  Pierre  Joseph  Proudhon  (born  1809,  died  1865). 
His  name  is  forever  connected  with  his  promulgation  of 
the  doctrine  that  "property  is  theft,"  although  he  did  not 
originate  it.  Says  Prof.  Ely  :  "Proudhon  was  the  first  to 
attempt  to  prove  directly  and  scientifically  that  private 
property  per  se  was  a  monstrosity — was  robbery." 
Proudhon  considered  private  property  the  greatest  obsta- 
cle to  Communism.  In  his  ideal  society  there  would  be 
the  most  absolute  equality  of  remuneration ;  the  duration 
of  labor  was  the  only  just  measure  of  value;  and  com- 
pensation should  be  equal  for  the  same  duration  of  labor, 
independent  of  the  skill  or  knowledge  required,  or  the 
nature  of  the  labor.  Next  to  his  famous  declaration  as 
to  private  property,  Proudhon  is  chiefly  known  as  the 
father  of  Philosophic  Anarchism. 

For  some  years  after  the  Paf^s  Commune  there  was 
but  little  heard  of  Socialism  in  France.  In  1878  the  Gen- 
eral Trade  Union  Congress  at  Lyons  endorsed  Socialist 
candidates,  and  a  number  of  the  Unions  declared  for  the 
entire  Socialist  programme;  and  in  1879  the  General 
Trade  Union  Congress  itself  pronounced  for  Socialism. 
Since  then  there  have  been  a  number  of  "splits"  on  the 


278  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

old  troublesome  question  of  Opportunism  and  of  advo- 
cating ameliorative  legislation  versus  strict  Marxian  So- 
cialism. These  disagreements  divided  the  party  until 
1905,  when  there  was  a  union  formed  of  the  various 
groups  and  schools  under  the  name  of  Parti  Socialist  do 
France,  or  Le  Parti  Socialist. 

The  growth  of  Socialism  in  France  is  shown  by  the 
increase  of  the  Socialist  vote  in  Parliamentary  elections 
cast  in  the  years  given  below : 

1885  3°>°°o; 

1887  47,000 ; 

1889  120,000 ; 

1893  440,000 ; 

1898  700,000 ; 

1902  805,000 ; 

1906  1 ,000,000. 

At  the  general  elections  in  1910  the  United  Socialists 
increased  their  representation  in  the  Chamber  of  Depu- 
ties from  54  to  76. 

There  was  general  surprise  when  the  President  of 
France  selected  a  Socialist,  M.  Briand,  to  form  a  Cabi- 
net ;  and  there  were  forebodings  when  the  new  Premier 
called  up<m  two  Socialist  comrades,  MM.  Millerand  and 
Viviani,  to  be  his  colleagues.  It  was  the  prevailing  as- 
sumption thai  France  had  again  embarked  upon  the  sea 
of  Socialism.  This  expectation,  however,  has  not  been 
realized:  the  present  Cabinet  is  not  Socialist,  but,  if  any- 
thing, it  is  rather  the  reverse.  The  Socialism  of  M. 
Briand  is  "a  thing  of  the  past,"  at  least  while  he  is  Pre- 
mier of  France;  and  In  a  great  strike  of  railroad  men  in 
[910  he  splendidly  demonstrated  the  fact  that  he  was  the 
Chief  Executive  of  the  Republic.     I. ike  John  Burns,  the 


CONTINENTAL    SOCIALISM  279 

British  Socialist  (as  a  working  man),  he  became  a  con- 
servative when  he  assumed  the  responsibilities  of  office  ; 
and,  like  John  Burns,  he  is  often  called  a  "turn-coat"'  by 
his  old  comrades.  At  present  Premier  Briand  is  not  con- 
sidered a  Socialist.  M.  Millerand — a  member  o  f  the 
Cabinet — was  "excommunicated"  by  the  Socialists  and 
the  Masonic  lodges  several  years  ago;  and  as  to  M. 
Viviani  (who  is  Minister  of  Labor),  he  appears  to  be  an 
Opportunist  Social  Reformer  rather  than  a  Socialist. 
Still,  as  an  English  critic  has  pointed  out,  not  one  of 
these  three  high  officials  of  the  French  Government  has 
so  far  as  publicly  known  recanted  the  Collectivist  views 
formerly  avowed. 

In  November,  191 1,  two  notable  figures  in  International 
Socialism,  M.  Lafargue  and  his  wife  Laura — a  daughter 
of  Karl  Marx — committed  suicide  by  taking  prussic  acid. 
M.  Lafargue  was  69  years  of  age.  He  was  one  of  the 
leaders  of  Marxism  in  France.  In  a  letter  to  Jules 
Guesde,  the  anti-Militarist  leader,  M.  Lafargue  explained 
that  he  was  about  to  take  his  life  to  escape  senile  decay. 
Madame  Lafargue  committed  suicide  because  she  did  not 
wish  to  survive  her  husband.  It  is  an  extraordinary  and 
tragic  coincidence  that  Mme.  Lafargue's  sister  Eleanor 
committed  suicide  in  London,  in  March,  1898.  She  was 
a  very  brilliant  woman,  and  married  a  well-known  Eng- 
lish Socialist,  Dr.  Edward  Aveling.  It  is  said  that  the 
cause  of  her  suicide  was  domestic  unhappiness.  Jt  is  due 
to  the  memory  of  K#rl  Marx  himself  to  say  that  his 
domestic  life  and  personal  conduct  were  beyond  reproach. 

The  Movement  in  Austria. 

Socialism  in  Austria-Hungary  was  introduced  from 
Germany.     The   greatest   obstacle   to   its   spread    in  the 


280  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

dual-empire  is  that  of  race  and  national  prejudices.  It 
has  developed  mostly  among  the  German  speaking  popu- 
lation, but  the  party  is  organized  on  a  basis  of  national 
autonomy  and  international  solidarity,  and  there  are  Ger- 
man, Czech,  Polish,  Italian,  Slavic  and  Ruthenian  sec- 
tions. Arising  out  of  the  Revolution  of  1848  there  were 
efforts  to  secure  social  reform,  and  in  1859  an  industrial 
code  was  adopted,  the  special  object  of  which  was  to  re- 
store the  relations  of  the  manufacturers  and  workmen 
with  the  guilds,  but  the  attempt  was  a  failure.  The  Labor 
Party  of  Austria  is  Socialistic.  In  1867  a  partial  right 
of  assembly  and  association  was  granted  ;*  this  was  fol- 
lowed by  a  development  of  the  movement,  and  the  Work- 
ingmen's  Mutual  Improvement  Society  was  formed  that 
year.  There  was  a  division  in  1868,  and  Anarchism 
manifested  itself:  indeed,  there  has  always  been  consider- 
able Anarchism  in  Austrian  Socialism.  Through  the  ab- 
sorption of  the  Trade  Union  element  there  came  a  revival 
of  Socialism,  and  in  1888  the  party  (with  the  exception 
of  the  Anarchists)  united  upon  the  principles  of  Marxian 
Socialism.  In  1892  the  Social  Democrats  expelled  the 
Revolutionists,  who  thereupon  joined  the  Anarchists.  In 
Hungary  there  are  two  branches  of  the  Socialist  organi- 
zation— one  among  the  industrial  workers,  and  the  other 
among  the  agricultural  laborers  and  the  non-Hungarian 
rationalists.  Within  the  last  few  years  there  has  been 
considerable  strength  shown  in  Austria  by  a  Roman 
Catholic  Christian  Socialist  organization,  under  Prince 
|ohn  of  Lichtenstein,  and  in  Hungary  by  the  christian 
Laborers  (a  union  of  Christian  Trade  Unionists)  — both 
of  which  are  for  the  purpo  e  of  promoting  social  reform, 

bul    are   opposed   to   the    International    Social    Democracy. 

Largeh  becau  e  of  the  agitation  carried  on  by  the  Social 


CONTINENTAL    SOCIALISM  281 

Democrats,  universal  suffrage  was  granted,  and  at  the 
general  election  of  1907  the  Social  Democrats  elected 
87  deputies  to  the  Reichsrath, — a  fifth  of  the  whole  Cham- 
ber— they  polling  1,041,948  votes,  nearly  a  third  of  the 
total  vote  cast.  One  of  the  most  impressive  public  dem- 
onstrations ever  held  in  any  country  by  the  proletariat 
was  that  held  under  the  auspices  of  the  Social  Democracy 
at  Vienna,  on  November  28,  1905,  in  favor  of  universal 
suffrage. 

The  Social  Democratic  Party  of  Austria-Hungary  is 
strongly  anti-Semitic,  principally  because  the  Jews  have 
become  the  greatest  land-owners  in  that  country,  and  are 
the  financial  creditors  of  the  peasantry.  The  Jews  own 
one-quarter  of  the  land  in  Hungary,  and  a  single  Jewish 
family,  that  of  the  Rothschilds,  owns  one-third  of  all  Bo- 
hemia ;  the  Jews  are  also  large  employers  of  labor,  and 
they  are  said  not  to  be  good  employers.  But  in  the 
neighboring  country  of  Roumania  Socialism  is  very 
largely  a  movement  promoted  by  the  Jewish  proletariat. 
The  most  prominent  Austrian  name  in  connection  with 
Socialism  is  that  of  Dr.  Albert  Eberhard  Friedrich 
Schaffle,  formerly  Minister  of  Commerce.  His  Quintes- 
sence of  Socialism  is  considered  by  many  authorities,  both 
Socialist  and  anti-Socialist,  to  be  the  ablest  exposition  of 
Marxism  ever  written,  not  even  excepting  that  by  Engels. 
There  have  always  been  much  uncertainty  and  specula- 
tion as  to  the  actual  personal  views  on  Socialism  held  by 
Dr.  Schaffle.  Most  certainly,  after  reading  his  Quintes- 
sence, one  is  almost  justified  in  assuming  that  he  is  a  con- 
vinced Socialist;  but  this  he  denies  in  his  subsequent 
Impossibility  of  Social  Democracy,  which,  except  in  two 
or  three  particulars  (especially  his  monarchial  bias)  is 
accepted  by  must  authorities  as  the  keenest  and  most  log- 


282  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

ical  refutation  of  Marxian  philosophy  ever  published. 
In  all  literature  it  would  be  difficult  to  match  Dr.  Schaf- 
fle's  Quintessence  of  Socialism  and  his  Impossibility  of 
Social  Democracy,  as  a  case  of  the  poison  and  the  anti- 
dote being  prescribed  by  the  same  physician. 

Italian  Socialism. 

No  other  American  writer  understands  the  Continental 
proletariat  better  than  the  brilliant  Robert  Hunter  does. 
In  his  Socialists  at  Work  he  asserts  that  Socialism  has 
taken  hold  of  the  masses  of  Italy  in  a  way  that  cannot 
be  paralleled  in  many  other  countries,  and  this  he  attri- 
butes to  the  brutalizing  and  oppressive  policy  of  the 
upper  classes,  and  he  says  that  hatred,  suspicion  and  fear 
are  the  only  sentiments  that  can  exist  between  them  and 
the  poor  people.  In  Italy — as  indeed,  in  all  Latin  coun- 
tries— the  fear  of  Socialism  has  become  almost  a  mania. 
Hunter  continues : 

In  talking  with  well-to-do  men,  one  frequently  hears  it 
said,  with  a  kind  of  despair,  that  Socialism  is  inevitable. 
.  .  .  In  considering  the  Italian  movement,  one  must  al- 
ways bear  in  mind  the  history  and  tradition  of  Italy.  It  has 
ever  been  a  land  of  conspiracy,  revolution  and  guerrilla  war- 
fare. "The  psychology  <>f  Italy,"  an  Italian  author  has  said, 
"permits  a  vehement  tendency  to  murder.  This  form  of 
crime  is  only  rarely  disclaimed  by  the  national  morale;  it  is 
often  glorified;  ami  many  of  our  moralists  admit  that  the 
issination  of  a  compatriol  sometimes  resolves  itself  into 
.1  duty  tn  tlu-  (.immunity."  The  history  of  all  its  political 
Struggles,  "f  all  it ^  uprisings  against  oppression,  shows  a 
tendency  t"  run  tn  extreme  violence,  even  under  the  guid- 
ance  of  humanitarians  such  as  Mazzini,  Garibaldi,  or  the 
present  day  Socialist  leaders.  It  should  also  be  borne  in 
mind    that    the    Italians    were    among   the    first    in    Europe  to 

:  the  Anarchist  views  of  I'.akoiminc. 


CONTINENTAL    SOCIALISM  283 

Until  the  extension  of  the  franchise  in  1882  the  An- 
archists were  the  most  important  of  the  different  groups 
participating  in  the  workingmen's  movements  in  Italy. 
Unlike  their  British,  American  and  ( ierman  comrades, 
the  Italian  Trade  Unionists  are  largely  in  sympathy  with 
the  Anarchistic  revolutionary  school  of  Socialists;  and  in 
this  particular  the  Italian  Trade  Unionists  are  like  the 
French.  The  Italian  Revolutionists  are  called  "Syndical- 
ists," because  they  believe  that  the  "Syndicates"  (which 
is  the  Italian  name  for  the  Trade  Unions)  are  the  sole 
hope  for  the  overthrow  of  the  present  industrial  and 
political  conditions.  [Of  recent  years  "Syndicalism"  has 
also  become  an  active  phase  of  French  Socialism.]  Since 
1906 — when  the  policy  of  the  Italian  Opportunists  or  Re- 
formers was  approved  by  five-sixths  of  the  party — the 
anti-physical-force  Revolutionary  school  have  taken  the 
name  of  "Integralists."  In  1907  the  "Syndicalists,"  in 
conjunction  with  the  Trade  Unionists,  by  an  almost 
unanimous  vote,  resolved  upon  complete  secession  from 
the  Socialist  Party.  During  1908  the  bickerings  between 
the  different  Socialist  parties  continued,  although  an  at- 
tempt was  made  at  a  national  convention  at  Florence  to 
patch  up  the  divisions,  so  that  the  various  groups  could 
present  a  united  front  to  the  common  enemy.  The  two 
great  heroes  of  Italy,  Garibaldi  and  Mazzini,  were  both 
Republicans  and  Revolutionists,  but  they  were  not  Social- 
ists, and  the  latter  opposed  the  policy  of  both  the  two 
patriots.  Mazzini  believed  in  association  as  opposed  to 
competition  ;  but  he  also  believed  in  self-sacrifice,  and  his 
watchwords  included  "duties,"  as  well  as  "rights;"  and 
while  Socialism  has  a  great  deal  to  say  about  "rights,"  it 
knows  no  such  word  as  "duties."  After  a  number  of 
abortive  attempts,  a  national  party  was  formed  in   1892, 


284  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

and  it  was  then  that  the  Socialists  formally  withdrew 
from  the  Anarchists.  In  addition  to  the  division  as  to 
Anarchism,  there  have  heen  continued  and  bitter  contro- 
versies in  regard  to  the  interminable  question  of  the 
policy  toward  immediate  reforms  and  parliamentary  ac- 
tion; but  with  all  the  internal  turmoils  of  the  Italian 
Socialists  they  have  rendered  signal  service  to  their  coun- 
try by  exposing  official  corruption. 

In  191 1  the  Italian  Socialists  made  an  unsuccessful 
attempt  to  arouse  public  sentiment  against  the  govern- 
ment expedition  for  the  conquest  of  Tripoli. 

Russia's  Revolutionary  Socialism. 

Revolution,  Nihilism,  Anarchism :  these  words  are  gen- 
erally used  to  describe  Socialism  in  Russia.  Ensor,  in 
his  Modern  Socialism,  claims  that  "Socialism  has  played 
a  great  part  in  the  upheaval  in  Russia."  Coming  from 
an  accepted  authority,  this  is  a  rather  loose  statement. 
There  is  very  little  real  Socialism  in  Russia,  that  is,  eco- 
nomic-political Socialism,  as  the  term  is  understood  in 
America,  Germany  or  England.  It  may  be  said,  indeed, 
that  terrorism  is  a  feature  of  all  Russian  political  parties; 
yet  terrorism,  even  though  in  recent  times  it  has  been 
>>ciated  with  Socialism,  would  have  existed  just  as 
violently  and  would  have  been  just  as  chronic,  had  Marx 
never  written  Capitol.  It  is  absolutely  impossible  to  com- 
pile a  history  of  Socialism  in  Russia  without  including  a 
ume  of  desperate,  bloody  protests  and  struggles 
inst  cruel  despotism,  on  each  side  the  most  terrible 
to  he  found  in  history;  and  the  difficulty  is  in  separating 
the  agitation  for  Socialism,  pure  and  simple,  from  this 
awful  record.  Even  Socialists — that  is,  Germans,  Eng- 
lishmen and  Americans,  of  the  prevailing  "constitutional" 


CONTINENTAL    SOCIALISM  285 

type — seem  in  despair  when  talking  or  writing  about 
Socialism  in  Russia.  Of  course,  a  general  review  of  the 
situation  in  Russia  at  the  present  day  as  compared  to 
what  it  was  twenty  years  ago,  affords  some  slight  reason 
for  hopefulness  for  a  better  state  of  things ;  but  at  the 
same  time,  the  way  is  strewn  with  disappointments.  It 
seems  as  if  even  such  a  beneficent  act  as  the  Emancipa- 
tion of  the  Serfs,  in  1861,  has  had  a  curse  attached  to  it. 
Before  then.  Nihilism  did  not  represent  violence,  but 
popular  education ;  the  Nihilists  founded  Sunday-schools 
and  reading  circles,  although  at  the  earliest  period  of 
their  history  revolutionary  Socialism  was  popular  among 
them.  One  Russian  writer  describes  Nihilism  as  "a  fatal 
unbelief  in  everything;"  another  calls  it  "the  spirit  of 
intellectual  revolt."  Nihilism  seems  to  be  a  very  part  of 
the  Russian  nature — bred  therein  by  centuries  of  oppres- 
sion. Diderot  explains  that  the  extravagant  tempera- 
ment of  the  Russian  people  is  owing  to  the  fact  that  "they 
were  rotten  before  they  were  ripe."  There  can  be  no 
doubt  that  the  chief,  if  not  the  exclusive  reason  for  the 
awful  sanguinary  disposition  of  nearly  all  political  and 
social  reformers  in  Russia  is  owing  to  the  system  of  gov- 
ernment— the  most  despotically  oppressive  in  all  modern 
history.  The  ( icrmans  describe  the  governmental  system 
of  Russia  as  being  that  of  a  "Functionary  State"  and  not 
a  "Law  State" — that  is,  it  is  a  government  by  arbit 
functionaries,  and  not  by  legal  enactments.  The  emanci- 
pation of  the  serfs  has  not  been  an  unmixed  blessing. 
even  to  the  peasants  themselves.  They  have  not  as  much 
land  as  they  had  before  emancipation,  and  they  do  not  re- 
ceive as  much  of  the  produce  of  their  labor  as  beu  re. 
One  of  the  greatest  of  the  Revolutionary  Socialists,  Alex- 
ander Hertzen  (born  1812,  died  1870),  was  of  the  opinion 


286  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

that  Russia's  deliverance  would  come  by  the  application 
of  the  operations  of  the  "Mir"  to  the  national  govern- 
ment of  the  Empire.  Hertzen  was  a  friend  of  Bakounin, 
the  Revolutionary  Anarchist,  and  he  imbibed  his  princi- 
ples. Naturally  he  got  into  trouble  with  the  government, 
and  was  treated  as  a  "dangerous  person ;"  then  he  went 
to  London  and  published  a  political  and  social  paper 
called  the  Kolokol  (Bell).  After  witnessing  some  of  the 
Continental  revolutions  of  1848  Hertzen  settled  perma- 
nently in  England,  and  from  his  retreat  he  addressed  a 
letter  (which  has  become  famous)  to  the  new  Czar,  Alex- 
ander II,  urging  him  to  give  the  people  a  more  liberal 
government  than  his  father,  Nicholas,  had  done.  In  his 
younger  days  Hertzen  believed  in  Socialism  as  the  new 
"terrestrial  religion,''  in  which  there  was  to  be  neither 
God  nor  heaven ;  in  which  all  government,  human  or 
Divine,  was  to  be  absent.  "Christianity,"  he  averred, 
"made  the  slave  a  son  of  man  ;  the  Revolution  has  eman- 
cipated him  into  a  citizen.  Socialism  would  make  him 
a  man."  But  after  being  in  England  some  time  he  grew 
away  from  these  extreme  revolutionary  views :  and  to 
the  young  Russian  exiles  who  would  visit  him  he  would 
say.  "Our  black  earth  needs  a  deal  of  draining."  The 
friend  of  his  youth,  Bakounin,  still  an  Anarchist,  saw 
him  in  London,  and  found  that  Hertzen  and  he  had 
patted  company  as  to  their  opinions  in  regard  to  the  re- 
generation of  society  and  the  way  it  should  be  brought 
about.  Shortly  before  his  death,  Hertzen  wrote  a  letter, 
full  of  dignified  pathos,  which  was  a  renunciation  of  his 
former  violent  sentiments.  The  letter  was  presumably 
written  to  Bakounin,  and  both  Socialists  and  anti-Social- 
mu  t  aj^rce  that  in  it-  way  it  is  a  classic.  Although 
Hertzen's   influence    with    his    fellow-countrymen    waned 


CONTINENTAL    SOCIALISM  287 

after  his  adoption  of  the  principles  of  gradual  reforma- 
tion and  amelioration  in  the  place  of  those  of  physical- 
force  Revolution,  yet  this  letter  is  worthy  to  be  treasured 
and  kept  in  mind  by  Russian  patriots  of  the  present  gen- 
eration.     I  le  said  : 

I  will  own  that  one  clay,  surrounded  by  dead  bodies,  by 
bouses  destroyed  with  balls  and  bullets,  and  listening  fever- 
ishly as  prisoners  were  being  shot  down,  I  called  with  my 
whole  heart  and  intelligence  upon  the  savage  force  of  ven- 
geance to  destroy  the  old  criminal  world,  without  thinking 
much  of  what  was  to  come  in  its  place.  Since  that  time 
twenty  years  have  gone  by ;  the  vengeance  has  come,  but  it 
has  come  from  the  other  side,  and  it  is  the  people  who  have 
borne  it,  because  they  comprehended  nothing  either  then  or 
since.  A  long  and  painful  interval  has  given  time  for  pas- 
sions to  calm,  for  thoughts  to  deepen  ;  it  has  given  the  neces- 
sary time  for  reflection  and  observation.  Neither  you  nor 
I  have  betrayed  our  convictions ;  but  we  see  the  question 
now  from  a  different  point  of  view.  You  rush  ahead,  as  you 
did  before,  with  a  passion  of  destruction,  which  you  take  for 
a  creative  passion ;  you  crush  every  obstacle ;  you  respect 
history  only  in  the  future.  As  for  me,  on  the  contrary,  I 
have  no  faith  in  the  old  revolutionary  methods,  and  I  try  to 
comprehend  the  march  of  men  in  the  past  and  in  the  pres- 
ent, to  know  how  to  advance  with  them  without  falling  be- 
hind, but  without  going  on  so  far  before  as  you,  for  they 
would  not   follow  me — they  could  not  follow  me! 

As  Prof.  Rae  (Contemporary  Socialism)  observes: 
"Bakounin  was  more  in  unison  with  the  troubled  spirit 
of  the  times"  than  was  Hertzen.  Bakounin  lias  been  de- 
scribed as  the  embodiment  of  a  revolutionist.  He  was 
active  in  the  International,  and  in  connection  with  that 
organization  he  wrote :  "We  wish  to  destroy  all  states 
and  all  churches,  with  all  their  institutions  and  laws, 
.     in  order  that  all  these  millions  of  poor  human 


288  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

beings     .     .     .     may  henceforth  and   forever  breathe  in 
absolute  freedom." 

It  is  not  within  the  scope  of  this  work  to  give  even  an 
outline  of  the  revolutionary  movement  in  Russia,  for  the 
reason   that,    properly   speaking,   as   explained   above,   it 
should  be  considered  as  only  incidental  to  economic  Mod- 
ern Socialism,  and  furthermore,  it  is  part  of  the  national 
history   of   the   Russian   people,   running  through  many 
generations,  quite  independent  of  the  theory  and  practice 
of  economic  Socialism.     When  Russia  had  developed  in- 
dustrially, then  economic  Socialism,  of  the  Marxian  kind, 
came  in  from  Germany.     Probably  had  the  Russian  Gov- 
ernment and  the  Czar  shown  even  a  modicum  of  discern- 
ing sense  of  the  irresistible  tendencies  of  the  times,  So- 
cialism  would  have  developed  along  saner  lines  than  it 
has  done,  and  much  sorrow  and  bloodshed  would  have 
been  spared.     Apart  from  the  question  whether  Father 
Gapon  was  an  honest  and  sincere  friend  of  the  people — 
which,  in  view  of  the  after-revelations,  seems  a  violent 
assumption — the  young  Czar  had  one  of  the  greatest  op- 
portunities which  the  Almighty  ever  put  into  the  hands 
of  a  monarch  to  bless  his  subjects  and  to  secure  for  all 
time  their  loyal  allegiance.     But  the  fateful  January  22, 
1905,  when  Gapon's  petition  was  met  with  a  butchery  of 
the  poor  unsuspecting  people,  has,  at  least  for  an  indefi- 
nite period,  killed  non-physical- force  Socialism,  and  has 
turned  it  into  the  bloody  and  secret  channels  of  the  old- 
ie  Anarchism.     The  mutinies   among  the   sailors   and 
Idiers  of  Russia,  the  futile  "general  strike"  of  the  rail- 
road   workers,  the  granting   of   a   sham   constitution   and 
the  assembling  of  a  supposed   Parliament  of  the  people, 
and  its  dismissal  becau  e  it  dared  to  show  that  it  thought 


CONTINENTAL    SOCIALISM  289 

it    was   a    free    assemblage     these    events,    following    h 
rapid  succe    iion,  are  almost  too  recent  to  be  history. 

Russian  S  cialism  is  divided  into  three  schools,  or 
rather  parties:    (1)    the   Socialist   Revolutionary   Party; 

(2)  the  Social  Democratic  Party,  which  is  Marxian;  and 

(3)  the  Bund,  composed  of  the  Jewish  proletariat.  In 
regard  to  the  land  programme  of  the  Socialist  Revolu- 
tionary Party,  which  is  for  absolute  confiscation,  the 
agrarian  population  is  in  sympathy  with  it,  and  the  Labor 
Group  also  acts  with  the  Revolutionists.  In  the  first 
Duma  the  proposition  to  socialize  the  land  received  only 
33  votes,  while  in  the  second  it  received  105.  The  Social 
Revolutionists  are  devoting  themselves  to  the  peasantry, 
as  they  consider  that  the  salvation  of  Russia  must  come 
through  them.  Although  the  Social  Democrats  are  Op- 
portunist to  a  certain  extent,  yet  their  goal  is  a  Collec- 
tivist  Republic,  and  for  the  accomplishment  of  this  end 
they  are  agitating  for  universal  suffrage. 

Among  the  influences  making  for  Socialism  in  Russia 
is  the  existence  of  some  thirteen  millions  of  "heretics," 
the  majority  of  whom  are  divided  into  various  religious 
sects,  although  a  considerable  number  are  free-thinkers. 
While  as  a  class  they  are  not  political  revolutionists,  yet 
they  are  "reformers:"  they  condemn  luxury  and  the  accu- 
mulation of  great  wealth,  they  declaim  against  war  and 
militarism,  and  declare  for  fraternity  and  mutual  assist- 
ance. 

In  1869  a  number  of  secret  societies  amalgamated  un- 
der the  name  of  the  Russian  Branch  of  the  International 
Workingmen's  Association.  In  [866  a  member  of  one 
of  these  secret  societies  made  the  first  attempt  on  the  life 
of  the  Czar;  and  in  1X73  eighty-seven  persons  were  tried 


2QO  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

for  belonging  to  the  International.  By  this  time  German 
economic  Socialism  was  permeating  Russia ;  a  large  edi- 
tion of  Marx's  Capital  was  sold,  and  mothers  had  their 
children  baptized  in  the  name  of  Lassalle.  But  Social- 
ism proper  was  soon  drawn  into  the  Nihilistic  maelstrom, 
and  Russian  Anarchists,  not  content  with  their  activi- 
ties at  home,  organized  and  participated  in  revolutionary 
outbreaks  in  France. 

Charles  Lapworth  has  a  supplementary  chapter  in 
Hunter's  Socialists  at  Work,  giving  an  account  of  the 
recent  movement  in  some  of  the  Continental  countries. 
As  to  the  situation  in  Russia  he  says  that  "the  brief  and 
eventful  career  of  the  Duma  has  clearly  demonstrated 
that  under  normal  conditions,  and  with  universal  suf- 
frage, the  Socialists  would  be  in  possession  of  govern- 
mental power."  As  to  the  first  and  second  Dumas,  the 
confidence  which  the  autocracy  had  put  in  the  peasants 
was  altogether  misplaced;  for — 

Instead  of  supporting  reaction,  the  peasants  sent  their  own 
representatives  to  parliament.  The  government,  therefore, 
changed  completely  the  "constitution,"  so  that  the  effect  of 
the  third  election  to  the  Duma  is  that  an  absolute  majority 
is  given  into  the  hands  of  135,000  of  landed  proprietors  and 
rich  bourgeois.  Thus  the  parliament  is  composed  of  the 
privileged  classes  and  their  creatures.  The  new  electoral 
law  has  given  nearly  three-fourths  of  the  seats  to  the  nobles, 
one-fourth  to  the  rich  bourgeois,  leaving  only  a  twentieth  to 
the  other  classes.  The  erstwhile  Socialist  members  have 
been  sent  to  Siberia  or  to  prison.  And  the  struggle  goes 
on. 

In  Finland,  a  province  of  Russia,  enjoying  certain 
rights  and  privileges  not  the  property  of  the  rest  of  the 
Empire,    universal    suffrage    was    recently    granted    to 


CON  i  [NENTAL    S(  )CIALISM  291 

women  as  well  as  to  men,  and  at  the  first  election  there- 
under 80  Socialists  obtained  seats,  out  of  a  total  mem- 
bership of  200,  nine  of  them  being  women  ;  and  in  1908 
the  number  of  Socialists  elected  was  83.  The  Social 
Democratic  Party  was  organized  in  1903.  The  police 
will  not  allow  any  publications  of  the  Social  Democracy 
to  be  circulated.  In  1905  the  party  had  50,000  paying 
members,  of  whom  io.ooo  were  women.  The  conces- 
sion of  universal  suffrage  was  forced  from  the  Russian 
Government  by  an  extraordinary  and  bold  proceeding 
by  the  Finnish  people.  They  proclaimed  a  "general 
political  strike,"  formed  practically  a  new  provincial  gov- 
ernment, with  a  complete  set  of  state  departments,  and 
ever\  thing  went  on  its  orderly  way ;  and  this  brought 
St.  Petersburg  to  terms. 

In  1909  the  Czar  of  Russia  visited  several  foreign 
countries,  and  the  Socialists — acting  on  a  circular  letter 
of  the  International  Bureau — made  vehement  protests 
wherever  he  went. 

On  September  14,  191 1,  a  terrorist  named  Bogrof 
assassinated  Premier  Stolvpin  by  shooting  him.  It 
seems  clear  that  he  was  forced  to  commit  the  crime  under 
threat  of  death  for  treachery  to  "the  cause,''  it  being 
claimed  that  he  was  a  police  spy  receiving  a  salary  of  $92 
a  month  from  the  Government.  Bogrof  was  executed 
privately   within  a   few  days. 

In  Poland  the  Socialists  act  with  the  German  organi- 
zation. 

Belgian  Socialism. 

"The  battle-ground  of  Europe"  has  main-  aspects  of 
interest  in  connection  with  the  subject  matter  of  this 
book.     It  is   the  smallest  country  in  Europe;  it  is  the 


292  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

most  densely  populated  in  the  world ;  in  no  other  country 
in  the  world  is  so  large  a  proportion  of  the  population 
engaged  in  purely  industrial  pursuits,  manufacturing  be- 
ing by  far  the  most  important  source  of  wealth  ;  the  per 
capita  of  exportations  is  the  largest  in  the  world ;  the 
population  is  the  most  illiterate  in  Europe ;  Belgium  has 
more  railroad  mileage  in  proportion  to  the  total  square 
mileage  than  any  other  country  in  the  world ;  it  is  the 
country  from  which  Marx  and  Engels  first  issued  their 
Communist  Manifesto,  in  1848;  and  it  is  the  "Paradise  of 
Capitalists."  Surely,  if  there  was  ever  rich  soil  for  the 
growth  of  Socialism  anywhere,  it  is  Belgium.  Yet,  con- 
sidering the  long-continued  and  ever-strenuous  efforts 
put  forth,  the  growth  of  Socialism,  in  a  political  sense, 
in  that  country,  has  not  been  remarkable.  But  this  fact, 
it  houkl  be  explained,  is  owing  largely,  if  not  altogether, 
to  the  peculiar  conditions  attached  to  the  franchise  in 
that  country.  There  is  what  is  described  as  universal 
suffrage  (with  compulsory  voting),  but  it  is  not  equal: 
more  than  a  third  of  the  electors,  those  of  some  property 
and  position,  have  two  and  even  three  votes  each,  while 
ths  working  men  have  only  one  vote  each,  although  this 
inequalit}  is  neutralized  to  a  slight  extent  by  propor- 
tional representation  of  minorities. 

The  mosl  distinctive  feature  of  Belgian  Socialism  is 
Co-operation,  which  came  down  from  the  middle  ages, 
ami  is  not  only  commercial  but  political  in  its  organiza- 
tion and  activities.  Some  co-operators  belong  to  the 
Clerical  Party  (Roman  Catholic),  and  pledge  themselves 
the  defen  e  of  "property,  religion  and  the  family." 
I'm  1  mosl  of  tl  e  co  op<  raton  are  members  <>f  the  Maison 
Peuple  (Hou  e  of  the  People) ,  a  branch  of  the  Social- 
ist-Co operative  organization,  which  started  in  a  modest 


CONTINENTAL    SOCIALISM 

way  in  1879,  and  is  now  established  in  all  the  centre 
industry  throughout  the  country.  From  the  profil  oi 
the  Co-operative  establishments  a  certain  deduction  is 
annually  made  for  propaganda  purposes.  Jn  1906  these 
societies  numbered  238,  with  sales  amounting  to  $7,600,- 
000;  and  over  100,000  peasants  are  members  of  the  rival 
Clerical  co-operative  societies. 

The  Belgian  Trade  Unions  are  the  successors  of  the 
trade  benefit  societies,  which  in  turn  were  the  successors 
of  the  medieval  guilds,  when  the  latter  were  abolished  in 
1795.  Most  of  the  Trade  Unions  belong  to  the  Labor 
Socialist  Party.  In  1906  there  were  nearly  150,000  or- 
ganized workers;  and  there  is  also  in  addition  a  Catholic 
Trade  L'nion  organization,  numbering  17,000,  affiliated 
with  the  Catholic  International  Workingmen's  Associa- 
tion. The  City  of  Ghent  gives  to  each  unemployed  man 
one  dollar  for  every  dollar  given  to  him  by  his  Trade 
Union.  There  are  throughout  the  country  several  thou- 
sand mutual  societies  which  insure  the  workers  against 
accident,  sickness,  old  age  and  death. 

In  1885  a  Socialist  Workingmen's  Party  was  organized 
under  the  name  of  the  Parti  ouvrier  beige.  There  was 
also  a  branch  of  the  American  Knights  of  Labor  formed. 
In  1893  the  Labor  Party,  aided  by  the  Brussels  Maison 
(iu  Peuple,  inaugurated  a  "universal  strike''  in  favor  of 
universal  and  equal  suffrage;  in  a  k-ttle  over  a  week  the 
government  yielded  certain  concessions,  but  did  not  grant 
equal  suffrage;  and  in  [902  there  was  another  universal 
strike  to  force  the  government  to  grant  equal  suffrage, 
but  it  was  not  successful. 

In  1906,  out  of  1 10  Senators,  the  Socialists  elected 
six:  and  in  the  Chamber  of  Deputies,  out  of  116  mem- 
bers, the   Socialists  elected   35,   there  also  being   elected 


294  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

two  "Christian  Democrats;"  in  1908  the  Socialists 
elected  36  members  of  the  Chamber  of  Deputies.  Of 
recent  years  the  status  of  the  party  has  been  stationary, 
and  it  would  seem  as  if  the  possibilities  of  any  further 
material  development,  at  least  in  voting  and  parliamen- 
tary strength,  have  been  arrested  under  the  unfair  con- 
ditions of  the  ballot.  There  is  another  reason  for  the 
evident  arresting  of  the  growth  of  Socialism  in  Belgium: 
The  party  has  from  the  first  been  identified  with  the  ex- 
treme wing;  the  strongest  section  of  the  International 
was  among  the  Belgians ;  and  the  movement  naturally 
runs  counter  to  the  national  religious  sentiments  of  the 
people.  This  fact  has  been  utilized  by  the  Catholic 
Church,  and  it  has  organized  a  rival  social-reform  move- 
ment which  appeals  to  a  considerable  section  of  the 
working  people. 

Socialism  in  Holland. 

In  the  former  Republic  of  the  Netherlands,  wealth  is 
very  unequally  divided  ;  wages  are  low,  and  the  taxes 
fall  heavily  upon  the  working  classes.  A  branch  of  the 
"International"  was  established  in  Holland  in  1869,  and 
ever  since  then  Dutch  Socialism  has  been  inclined  to 
Anarchism,  although  within  recent  years  the  development 
of  Marxian  principles  has  been  marked.  In  1878  there 
was  a  revival  of  Socialism  succeeding  the  collapse  of  the 
"International."  Bui  it  was  an  ex-Protestant  minister, 
I'".  I).  Nieuwenhuis,  who  established  Modern  Socialism 
in  Holland.  Pastor  Nieuwenhuis  left  the  Church  be- 
came he  became  convinced  that  it  was  on  the  side  of  the 
rich  against  the  poor,  and  he  founded  the  Social  Demo- 
cratic Union  in  [884.  Three  years  later  Nieuwenhuis 
was  sent  t<>  prison  "for  political  reasons,"  and  the  next 


CONTINENTAL   SOCIALISM  295 

year  he  was  elected  to  Parliament — the  first  Socialist  to 
have  a  seat  in  that  body.  This  ex-reverend  Socialist 
finally  became  too  radical  for  the  other  comrades,  and  in 
course  of  time  he  lost  his  influence.  The  division  over 
Anarchism  grew  very  sharp.  In  1889  the  Social  Demo- 
cratic League  was  founded,  on  Marxian  lines.  Refer- 
ring to  the  "harmonious"  existence  of  Anarchists  among 
the  Socialists  in  Holland,  Rae,  in  Contemporary  Social- 
ism, says  that,  "according  to  the  reports  of  the  American 
consuls,  nobody  in  the  country  thinks  any  harm  of 
either."  But  Rae  also  says:  "In  Holland,  of  all  conn- 
tries,  the  revolutionary  clement  continues  [in  1908]  the 
dominant  one  in  the  Socialist  Party,  and  in  1894  it  was 
not,  as  elsewhere,  the  revolutionists,  but  it  was  the  par- 
liamentarians, who  were  expelled  from  the  old  Social 
Democratic  Union."  In  1894  the  present  Social  Demo- 
cratic Party  was  organized  on  German  Marxian  princi- 
ples, by  twelve  men,  who  were  given  the  name  of  "the 
twelve  Apostles."  In  1901  there  was  a  split  among  the 
Liberals  on  the  suffrage  question,  the  radical  wing  of  the 
party  demanding  universal  suffrage  on  the  "one  man  one 
vote"  basis.  In  the  election  that  year,  of  the  100  mem- 
bers of  the  Lower  Chamber  of  the  "States  General," 
seven  Socialists  were  elected.  There  were  also  elected  11 
Liberal  Democrats,  their  programme  being  universal  suf- 
frage, curtailment  of  the  privileges  of  the  rich  and  the 
extension  of  those  of  the  working  people,  and  a  more 
equitable  division  of  wealth.  The  artist  and  intellectual 
classes  of  Holland  have  given,  as  Kirkup  expresses  it,  a 
"sympathetic  reception"  to  the  Socialist  movement,  but 
Trade  Unionism  in  Holland  has  suffered  from  its  identi- 
fication with  Anarchism.  In  [905  there  was  formed  a 
national  federation  of  Trade  Unions,  to  work  in  harmony 


296  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

with  the  newly-organized  Social  Democratic  Party.  Un- 
til a  recent  period  Holland  was  almost  entirely  given  to 
agriculture,  but  there  has  been  a  development  of  manu- 
facturing, and  with  it  there  has  been  a  growth  of  Trade 
Unionism,  and  also  of  Co-operation,  on  the  Belgian  sys- 
tem. In  1905  the  Socialists  polled  65,743  votes,  as 
against  38,279  in  1901  ;  but  they  only  elected  the  same 
number  of  Socialist  members  of  the  "States  General" — 
seven.  For  years  there  was  a  bitter  struggle  between 
the  Marxists  and  Revisionists  (Opportunists),  and  at  a 
special  Congress  held  in  February,  1909,  the  latter  school 
won  a  signal  victory.  At  the  election  later  the  Socialist 
vote  was  increased.  The  Marxists  (or  Tribunists) 
disgruntled  at  their  treatment  by  the  Revisionists,  ran 
candidates  of  their  own,  but  they  polled  only  a  few  votes. 

In  Switzerland. 

The  "playground  of  Europe"  and  "the  model  Repub- 
lic of  the  world,"  affords  a  brilliant  vindication  of  the 
principles  of  industrial  and  political  democracy,  and  at 
the  same  time  is  a  practical  argument  against  Revolu- 
tionary Socialism.  The  Swiss  are  probably  the  most 
happily-conditioned  people  in  the  world,  there  being  but 
few  very  wealthy  people  and  but  few  very  poor  among 
them.  There  have  been  more  blood-red  revolutionary 
Socialist  harangues  delivered  in  Switzerland  than  in  any 
other  country  in  the  world,  but  they  have  nearly  all  been 
delivered  by  alien'-  exiles  from  their  own  lands,  who 
have  sometimes  abused  the  hospitality  of  free  little 
Switzerland.  Rae,  in  Contemporary  Socialism,  says: 
'The  condition  ■  witzerland  shows  us  clearly  enough 
that  democracy  under  a  regime  of  Freedom  lends  no  ear 
ocialism,  bul  sets  its  \;n\-  in  entirely  different  direc- 


CONTINENTAL   SOCIALISM  297 

tions."  It  is  very  significant  that  Socialist  writers  and 
speakers  seldom  refer  to  Switzerland ;  and  the  reason  is 
obvious.  The  Jesuit  joint-authors,  Fathers  Cathrein  and 
Gettelmann   (Socialism)  say: 

With  regard  to  Switzerland  wc  may  repeat  what  we  have 
written  over  twenty  years  ago.  Despite  the  hospitality  ac- 
corded to  foreign  Socialists,  and  despite  the  greatest  free- 
dom of  expansion,  indigenous  Socialism  has  never  come  to 
be  of  any  importance.  In  1879,  the  Socialist  ranks  numbered 
up  to  15,000;  at  present  the  whole  party  as  such  amounts 
at  most  to  6,000  members.  The  Griitliverein,  an  association 
closely  allied  to  Socialism,  consisting  exclusively  of  native 
Swiss,  has  a  membership  of  16,000.  At  the  elections  for  the 
National  Council,  1902.  the  Socialists  returned  seven  candi- 
dates. The  total  of  Socialist  votes  is  estimated  at  63,000, 
but  many  of  them  were  polled  by  working  men  who  were 
not  Socialists.  The  reasons  for  the  slow  development  1  £ 
Swiss  Socialism  are  enumerated  by  G.  Adler  as  being  "first, 
the  obstacles  in  the  way  of  propagandism  owing  to  the  want 
of  industrial  concentration ;  secondly,  the  steadiness  of  the 
country's  political  and  social  development;  finally,  the  sober 
and  practical  character  of  the  nation,  which  shows  great  re- 
semblance to  the  sound  and  healthy  English  type." 

England  and  Switzerland  afford,  therefore,  very  instruc- 
tive object  lessons.  They  prove  to  evidence  that  wherever 
Socialism  is  untrammelled  by  restrictions,  and  must  take 
part  in  practical  social  reforms,  its  revolutionary  edge  is 
soon  blunted. 

Since  1887  the  Swiss  Workingmen's  Federation  [of 
Trade  Unions]  have  elected  a  "Workman's  Secretary,'' 
who  becomes  thereby  practically  a  member  of  the  Federal 
Cabinet,  and  is  paid  a  Salary  by  the  government.  It  i< 
believed  that  this  is  the  only  instance  of  this  sort  of  State 
recognition  of  organized  Labor,  although  in  1910  the 
British  Government  took  a  partial  step  in  this  direction. 


298  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

Another  institution  peculiar  to  Switzerland  is  the  volun- 
tary societies  for  public  utilities — charitable,  educational, 
sanitary,  etc.  Co-operation  is  considerably  developed, 
there  being  about  4,400  societies  in  1903.  Although 
Trade  Unions  have  grown  of  late  years,  it  is  said  they 
only  include  12  per  cent,  of  the  workingmen.  The 
different  classes  of  the  citizens,  as  regards  ownership  in 
this  world's  goods,  mix  freely,  and  take  part  in  the  many 
economic  and  social  institutions  of  the  country,  and  this, 
with  the  comparative  absence  of  great  wealth  and  great 
poverty,  prevents  the  development  of  a  "class-conscious" 
feeling  among  the  working  people  as  in  most  other  coun- 
tries. The  Griitlivcrcin  is  the  oldest  Labor  organiza- 
tion, it  dating  from  1838;  and  it  is  connected  with  the 
Socialist  Party.  Hunter's  Socialists  at  Work  practi- 
cally concedes  that  the  Socialism  of  this  organization  is 
of  a  mild  variety — or  at  any  rate  is  of  the  Fabian  type : 
"...  As  most  of  its  leaders  were  Liberals,  the  re- 
sult has  been  similar  to  that  in  England  ;  the  develop- 
ment of  a  distinctly  Socialist  party  has  been  compara- 
tively slow."  In  the  opinion  of  the  same  writer  the 
practical  effect  of  the  "referendum"  (which  is  in  opera- 
tion in  Switzerland  )  is  "that  the  peasant  class  especially 
is  inclined  to  be  conservative  and  impatient  of  politics, 
and  the  politician  tends  to  become  Opportunist."  Still, 
if  Socialists  at  Work  is  well-informed,  the  millennium 
docs  not  exist  even  in  Switzerland.  It  asserts:  "The 
electoral  system  is  open  to  much  fraud,  which  is  unscru- 
pulously practiced  by  the  capitalist  parties  to  keep  the 
workers  from  representation  in  the  National  Council. 
At  the  last  election  the  Socialists  assembled  70,000  votes, 
by  which  they  claim  to  have  won  twenty-five  seats,  but 


CONTINENTAL    SOCIALISM  2QQ 

they  were  only  allowed  six.  Recent  inquiries  have  been 
made  into  the  extent  of  exploitation  of  child  labor,  with 
the  appalling  revelation  that  53  per  cent,  of  the  children 
attending  school  are  also  employed  in  laborious  daily 
work.  .  .  .  Capitalism  has  become  intense,  and  with 
it  an  almost  savage  system  of  oppression  has  been  insti- 
tuted by  the  government."  The  same  work  says  that 
Switzerland  has  become  notorious  for  the  frequency  with 
which  the  soldiery  is  used  against  striking  workmen. 

[This  statement  leads  to  the  reflection  that  in  the  mat- 
ter of  the  use  of  the  strong  arm  of  the  State  against 
strikers,  a  Republic  is  inclined  to  be  more  drastic — 
quicker,  sterner,  and  to  use  repressive  measures  more 
frequently — than  is  a  constitutional  Monarchy.  For  in- 
stance :  armed  force  is  used  much  more  frequently,  and 
much  more  relentlessly,  in  the  United  States  and  France 
against  lawless  strikers  than  is  the  case  in  England.  In 
connection  with  this  phase  of  the  whole  question,  it  is  in- 
teresting to  note  that  while  theoretically  all  Modern  So- 
cialists are  Republicans,  yet  they  are  no  more  favorable 
to  a  Republican  form  of  government  under  the  existing 
"capitalistic  system''  than  they  are  to  a  Monarchical  sys- 
tem ;  that  is  why  so  many  even  of  the  so-called  Revolu- 
tionary Socialists  of  England  refrain  from  denouncing 
the  British  Royal  family.  It  is  a  fact  that  British  Social- 
ists frequently  declared  that  King  Edward  was  more  of 
a  true  Democrat  than — say  ex-President  Roosevelt!] 

While  most  of  the  Socialism  in  Switzerland  has  been 
taken  there  by  foreign  agitators  and  refugees,  there  is 
still  a  genuine,  native  Swiss  Socialism.  In  1873  a  Peo- 
ple's Association  was  formed,  and  also  a  Workers'  Fed- 
eration;  and  they  both,  in  1887,  adopted  the  programme 


300  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

of  Marxian  Socialism.  In  1884  there  was  a  Social  Demo- 
cratic Party  formed,  but  it  collapsed ;  the  present  Social 
Democratic  Party  (Marxian)  was  formed  in  1888. 

In  Denmark. 

The  peculiarity  of  the  Socialism  of  Denmark  is  the 
strong  hold  it  has  on  the  peasantry ;  and  yet  Denmark 
is  a  country   of  small   peasant   proprietors — a  condition 
which  it  is  almost  axiomatic  to  say  is  opposed  to  the  de- 
velopment of  Socialism.     Seven-eighths  of  the  whole  of 
Denmark   is  held  by  peasant  proprietors;  but  this  fact 
is  not  an   unmixed  blessing,  as  a   large  number  of  the 
proprietors   are   unable  to  extract  a  living  out  of  their 
holdings,  but  they  will  not  part  with  their  land ;  so  that, 
as  Rae  describes  it,  there  arises  a  kind  of  "proprietor- 
proletariat,"   and    no   doubt   this    is   one   of   the    leading 
causes  why  Socialism  is  so  attractive  to  the  peasants.     As 
to  the  condition  in  the  cities  and  towns,  a   remarkable 
official  report  was  made  to  the  British  Foreign  Office  in 
1870.     This  report  states  that  in   1867  one  out  of  every 
four  of  the  inhabitants  of  Copenhagen  was  in  receipt  of 
parochial  relief.     The  report  goes  on  to  say:     "No  fact 
in  my  report  is  more  certain  than  that  the  Dane  has  yet 
to  learn   the  meaning  of  the  word  work :  of  entireness 
and   thoroughness   he  has  seldom  any   adequate  notion. 
This  is  why  the   Swedish  artisan  can  so  often  take  the 
bread    from   his  mouth.''     But   the    British  official    (Mr. 
Strachey)    who  males   this   discouraging  report  of  the 
Danish  artisan,  ha9  a  far  different  opinion  of  the  Danish 
peasant.     He    declares    him    to    be — since    he    has    been 
freed  from  the  yoke  of  the  I  >anish  landlord,  who  was  the 
scourge  of  the  country-    "the  Ereest,  the  most  politically 
wise,  the  besl   educated  of  European  yeomen."     Social- 


CONTINENTAL    SOCIALISM  301 

ism  in  Denmark  dates  from  1871  ;  and  in  1872  a  branch 
of  the  "International''  was  formed.  It  is  a  remarkable 
fact  that  in  this  overwhelmingly  Protestant  country  the 
International  was  introduced  by  two  Roman  Catholics. 
They  appear  to  have  been  a  pair  of  precious  rascals,  and 
it  is  said  that  they  decamped  to  America  carrying  with 
them  the  funds  of  the  Socialist  organization.  The  Dan- 
ish "International"  then  "degenerated"  into  a  simple 
Trade  Union."  In  187'.  there  was  started  at  Copenhagen 
the  Social  Democrat,  and  it  is  flourishing  to  this  day,  it 
having  a  circulation  of  between  50,000  and  60,000.  The 
present  Socialist  organization,  the  Social  Democratic 
Union,  was  formed  in  1878;  it  is  in  close  alliance  with 
the  German  Social  Democracy,  and  it  is  constitutional  in 
its  methods.  A  peculiarity  of  it  is  that  it  embraces  two 
organizations — one  political,  and  the  other  economic,  the 
latter  being  the  Socialist  Trade  Unions.  Women  take 
an  active  part  in  the  Socialist  propaganda  in  Denmark. 
Ensor  (Modern  Socialism)  says  that  Denmark  "leads  the 
Continent  in  the  practical  realization  of  Socialist  ideas;" 
and  in  the  opinion  of  Robert  Hunter,  "the  Danish  Party 
stands  out  as  one  of  the  sturdiest  and  best-united  sec- 
tions of  the  International  movement."  Trade  guilds  were 
abolished  in  1857.  In  [898  there  was  established  a  na- 
tional system  of  Trade  Unions  similar  to  the  American 
Federation  of  Labor.  There  is  a  must  excellent  system 
of  pensioning  the  worthy  poor;  and  Co-operation  is  ex- 
tensive, it  being  on  the  English  Rochdale  plan.  In  1SX7 
the  Socialists  polled  8,408  votes;  in  [898  they  polled 
25,019;  and  in  1901  they  polled  41,955.  In  [889  they 
elected  one  deputy  to  the  Folkething  (Parliament),  out 
of  a  total  membership  of  114;  in  [903  they  elected  16 
deputies;  in  1906  they  elected  24  to  the  Folkething,  and 


302  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

four  to  the  Landsting  (the  Senate),  and  polled  76,012 
votes ;  and  they  also  elected  450  Councillors  in  the  dif- 
ferent cities  and  towns,  and  400  in  the  rural  communi- 
ties. Combined  with  the  Radicals,  the  Socialists  now 
have  the  majority  in  Danish  local  governments.  Of  all 
European  countries,  Denmark  is  the  most  advanced  in 
assistance  by  the  State  in  the  sale  and  export  of  farm 
products. 

In  Norway. 

In  Norway  the  Socialists  and  the  Labor  Party  are 
virtually  one ;  and  this  feature  is  also  characteristic  of 
the  other  Scandinavian  countries,  Sweden  and  Denmark. 
The  movement  in  the  three  countries,  in  fact,  has  a 
strong  bond  of  sympathy  uniting  them,  and  they  fre- 
quently hold  joint  conferences.  Socialism  was  intro- 
duced into  Norway  from  Denmark  in  1873,  and  a  branch 
of  the  International  was  established ;  and  there  was  a 
movement  towards  Socialism  during  the  agitation  for  a 
Republic  in  1883.  But  Socialism  did  not  show  any  vital- 
ity in  Norway  until  1885  ;  two  years  afterwards  the  Labor 
Party  was  formed,  and  in  1889  it  declared  itself  for  So- 
cialism. In  1897  the  Socialist-Labor  Party  cast  only 
947  votes:  in  1900  it  cast  7.440  votes;  in  1903  it  cast 
24,770,  and  elected  four  members  to  the  Storthing  (Par- 
liament), including  the  only  Roman  Catholic  member  of 
that  body;  in  [906  the  Socialists  polled  45,000  votes  ami 
elected  10  members  of  the  Storthing;  in  1901  they 
elected  31  municipal  councillors;  in  1904  they  elected 
74;  and  iu  [906  the)  elected  330,  ,1  number  of  them  be- 
ing women,  who  have  a  qualified  right  to  vote,  the  suffrage 
for  men  being  practically  universal.  It  is  in  its  munici- 
pal activities  that  Norwegian  Socialism  has  been  mostly 


CONTINENTAL    SOCIALISM  303 

conspicuous.  The  Socialists  were  much  disappointed  at 
the  result  of  the  plebescite  on  the  question  of  whether 
their  country,  on  its  secession  from  Sweden,  should  be  a 
Republic  or  a  Monarchy.  The  result  was:  for  a  Repub- 
lic, ()<),2(>.{ ;  for  a  Monarchy,  259,563.  Hunter's  Social- 
ists at  Work  narrates  this  incident :  "The  subsequent 
action  of  the  Socialists  in  voting  to  welcome  King 
Haakon  to  Norway  was  severely  criticised  throughout 
the  world  movement,  and  to  their  explanation  that  it 
would  have  been  unconstitutional  to  have  voted  other- 
wise after  the  referendum,  the  German  'Vorwarts'  re- 
torted, 'Since  when  have  Socialists  been  bound  by  con- 
stitutions?' Eventually  it  was  given  as  an  excuse  by 
the  leading  Socialist  review  that  the  party  was  very 
young,  and  that  it  must  be  remembered  it  had  not  been 
built  upon  an  economic  foundation  as  in  other  countries." 

In  Sweden. 

The  main  endeavor  of  the  Swedish  Socialists  so  far 
has  been  to  secure  unfettered  universal  suffrage,  and 
while  they  have  not  been  wholly  successful,  they  have 
been  able  to  obtain  a  considerable  extension  of  the  fran- 
chise within  recent  years.  The  International  form  of 
Socialism  was  introduced  into  Sweden  from  Denmark, 
but  it  did  not  thrive,  and  it  drifted  into  Trade  Unionism, 
which  assumed  an  organized  form  in  1880.  In  1885  the 
Trade  Unions  declared  for  Socialism  ;  in  1898  a  national 
organization  of  the  Trade  Unions  was  formed,  and  in 
1899  this  organization  formally  allied  itself  with  the 
Social  Democratic  Party.  In  1891  there  was  a  contest 
between  the  Anarchists  and  the  Marxians  in  the  party, 
and  the  Marxians  won.  In  1905  a  Congress  of  the 
Swedish  Socialists  (the  Norwegian  Socialists  being  rep- 


304  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

resented)  declared  for  the  unqualified  right  of  the  Nor- 
wegian people  to  manage  their  own  national  affairs,  and 
this  declaration  had  a  great  effect  in  bringing  about  a 
peaceable  arrangement  between  the  two  countries  for 
separation. 

The  "general  strike"  is  a  characteristic  weapon  in  the 
hands  of  the  Swedish  Labor-Socialists.     During  August 
and  September  cf   1909  there  was  the  most    extensive 
demonstration  of  this  character  which  lias  occurred   in 
the   industrial   history  of   the   country.     It   was   precipi- 
tated by  a  "lock-out"  on  a  large  scale,  that  being  a  not 
infrequent  expedient  on  the  part  of  Swedish  employers 
when  they  wish  to  bring  their  workmen  to  terms.     At 
the  beginning  of  August,  80,000  employees  were  locked 
out.     The    National   organization   of  the   Trade   Unions 
took  up  the  matter,  and  it  was  decided  to  call  a  "general 
strike"  as  a  protest  and  to  cause  such  a  "tie-up"  in  the 
country's  industrial   and  commercial  affairs  as  to  force 
employers    to    abandon    "lock-outs"    as    a    policy.     The 
"general  strike"  took  effect  August  4th.     Out  of  half  a 
million  industrial  workers  in  Sweden,  about  half  belong 
to  Trade    Unions ;   and   most   of   the   latter  obeyed  the 
order  to  strike,  a  notable  exception,  however,  being  the 
railroad  men  ;  and  many  thousands  of  unorganized  work- 
ers also  joined  the  strikers.     <  )n  September  6th  the  La- 
bor  Federation   formally  "called  off"  the  strike,  on  the 
promise  of  the  National  Government  to  make  as  satis- 
factory a  settlement  as  possible;  but  the  strike  was  prac- 
tically  a    failure.     A   noticeable   feature  of   the   struggle 
was  the  complete  absence  of  violence.     Since   1900  the 
Trade  Unionists  have  increased  from  46,000  to  1.14,000 
in    [908.     In    [896  the  Socialists  elected  one  member  to 
the  Diet  |  Parliament  )  out  of  a  total  membership  of  230; 


CONTINENTAL    SOCIALISM  305 

in  1905  they  elected  15  members,  and  cast  30,000  votes; 
and  in  [908  they  elected  ^t,  members.  The  fact  that 
there  are  thousands  more  of  paying  members  to  the 
Socialist  organization  than  cast  Socialist  votes,  shows 
the  disadvantage  under  which  the  Socialists  labor  in  re- 
gard to  the  franchise.  The  enrolled  Socialist  vote  fell 
from  112,693  m  ]9°9  to  60,813  in  19 10.  At  the  first 
election  under  Universal  Suffrage,  held  in  September, 
191 1,  there  was  a  notable  increase  in  the  Socialist 
strength  in  the  Second  Chamber  of  Parliament. 

Spain  and  Portugal. 

Spain  had  no  Socialist,  no  representative  of  the  prole- 
tariat, in  its  National  Legislature  until  1910,  when 
Madrid  sent  one ;  but  it  has  for  some  years  back  elected 
a  number  of  Socialist  town  councillors.  Socialism  ap- 
peared in  Spain  in  1868,  and  until  1888  w;  wholly  of 
the  Anarchistic  character.  In  1873  the  "International" 
had  674  branches  and  300,000  members  in  Spain.  The 
method  of  progaganda  by  the  Socialists  was  extraordi- 
nary :  they  usually  held  their  meetings  in  the  churches — 
God,  religion,  the  priests  and  the  rich  being  denounced 
from  the  pulpits.  Rae  observes  that  the  revolutionary 
tradition  of  Spain  has  always  favored  communal  auton- 
omy, "but  in  a  country  like  Spain,  where  communal  prop- 
erty exists  already  to  a  large  extent,  the  idea  of  making 
all  other  property  communal  property  lies  ever  at  hand 
as  a  ready  resource  of  reformers."  Since  1882  there 
has  been  a  Democratic  Labor  Party,  established  on 
Marxian  lines,  but  its  membership  has  never  been  great. 
In  Spain  the  tendency  of  Socialism  is  toward  extreme 
Anarchism.  But  this  tendency  ought  in  fairness  to  be 
dissociated   from    the   recognized   doctrines   of    Modern 


3o6  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

Socialism ;  it  is  rather  to  be  considered  as  a  violent  pro- 
test on  the  part  of  Republican  Atheists  (who,  however, 
are  also  Socialists)  against  the  Monarchy  and  the  tyran- 
nical system  of  government.  These  were  the  under- 
lying reasons  for  the  bomb  outrage  against  the  young 
King  and  his  English  bride  as  they  were  returning  to 
the  royal  palace  after  the  wedding  ceremony,  and  for 
the  other  outbreaks,  particularly  at  Barcelona.  The 
court-martial  and  execution  of  Prof.  Francisco  Ferrer 
in  October,  1909,  has  fanned  the  flame  of  fierce  discon- 
tent, and  the  present  outlook  in  Spain  is  very  black. 

Socialism  proper  has  never  been  anything  but  an  ab- 
stract idea  in  Portugal,  although  late  reports  are  to  the 
effect  that  there  is  a  beginning  to  the  movement.  Ever 
since  1872  there  has  been  an  Anarchistic  sentiment,  and 
there  have  been  Anarchistic  organizations  of  a  limited 
membership  and  influence.  But  the  Anarchism  of  Por- 
tugal has  been  mostly  of  the  philosophical  kind — that  is, 
while  its  adherents  advocated  the  abolition  of  all  organ- 
ized government,  they  repudiated  physical  force  as  a 
means  of  attainment.  While  the  Socialists  took  part  in 
the  establishment  of  the  Republic  in  19 10,  the  revolution 
really  had  nothing  to  do  with  Socialism. 

"There  is  the  beginning  of  a  Socialist  movement  in 
Greece."  Such  was  an  official  "International"  report  in 
1909.  Its  growth  has  been  phenomenal,  for  in  Septem- 
ber, 1910,  the  Socialists  elected  10  members  to  the  new 
National  Assembly. 

Turke)  seems  to  be  the  only  European  country — if  it 
can  be  so  designated — which  remains  unaffected  by  the 
world-sweep  of  Socialism;  and  yet,  even  in  Turkey,  the 
seed  has  been  sown. 


CHAPTER    XII 

THE    NEW    "INTERNATIONAL" 

hi  America  there  is  a  general  failure  to  appreciate  not 
only  the  immanence  of  Socialism  as  an  active  and  poten- 
tial force  in  this  country,  hut  also  that  it  is  a  stupendous 
fact  as  an  International  movement.  Taking  each  of  the 
countries  as  a  unit,  Socialism  as  an  organized  force  is  far 
and  away  more  thorough,  more  disciplined,  more  zealous, 
more  devoted  to  its  objects  and  the  membership  more 
willing  to  work  in  season  and  out  of  season  and  to  make 
personal  sacrifices  for  the  attainment  of  those  objects, 
than  is  the  case  with  any  other  society,  secular,  religious, 
or  social,  with  possibly  one  exception, — the  Catholic 
Church — and  that  exception  possibly  would  not  apply  to 
the  general  membership.  So,  as  an  International  social- 
political  movement,  Socialism  stands  unique :  in  perfec- 
tion of  detail  of  organization,  in  world-wide  scope,  in 
enthusiasm,  and  in  unity  of.  purpose,  there  is  nothing  to 
compare  with  Socialism  excepting  its  great  opponent,  the 
( Catholic  Church. 

The  old  "International,"  which  broke  up  largely  be- 
cause of  the  conflict  between  Marx  and  Bakounin,  be- 
tween Socialism  proper  and  Anarchism,  has  been  suc- 
ceeded by  the  immeasurably  more  powerful  and  cosmo- 
politan Socialist  Congress.  This  new  organization  dates 
from  July,  1889,  when  two  rival  Socialist  and  Working- 

307 


308  WHAT   IS    SOCIALISM? 

men's  Congresses  were  held  at  Paris,  one  being  strictly 
Marxian  and  the  other  "Possibilist,"  or  "Fabian  Oppor- 
tunist," the  latter  including  Trade  Unionists.  Since  1891 
the  two  distinctive  schools  have  met  together  in  one  In- 
ternational Congress,  practically  all  phases  of  the  cult 
being  represented  with  the  exception  of  Anarchists, 
Trade  Unionists  and  Co-operators  being  also  included — 
indeed,  the  new  "International"  is  as  much  Trade  Union 
as  Socialist  in  its  derivation  and  purpose.  This  fact  is 
important,  as  it  emphasizes  the  difference  between  the  old 
and  the  new  spirit  of  Socialism.  Formerly,  Trade 
Unionists  and  Co-operators,  as  such,  were  looked  upon 
coldly  and  sometimes  were  actively  opposed  by  genuine 
Socialists.  Under  a  standing  order  the  call  for  the  Con- 
gress includes  all  "genuine  trade  or  labor  organizations," 
even  "though  taking  no  militant  part  in  politics."  At  the 
last  Congress  this  question  was  threshed  out,  the  old-line 
British  Marxists  objecting  to  representation  from  the 
English  Laborites ;  but  the  claims  of  the  latter  were  sup- 
ported by  the  leaders  of  the  German  Social  Democracy, 
and  they  carried  the  day  overwhelmingly.  The  practical 
result  of  this  policy  has  been  to  give  momentum  to  the 
tendency  on  the  part  of  Trade  Unionists  and  Co-oper- 
ators throughout  the  world  to  embrace  the  special  tenets 
of  Socialism.  The  eighth  and  last  Congress  was  held 
at  Copenhagen,  Denmark,  in  September,  1910,  and  was 
attended  by  887  representatives  from  33  nations,  the 
British  Section  forming  the  largest  of  the  national 
groups.  I  Inemployment  and  Militarism  formed  the  chief 
topics  of  discussion.  Resolutions  in  favor  of  co-opera- 
tion  between  Socialists  and  Trade  Unionists  were  unani- 
mously adopted.  As  compared  with  previous  Interna- 
tional gatherings  of  Socialists,  the  Copenhagen  Congress 


THE   NEW   "INTERNATIONAL"  309 

was  conspicuously  conservative — so  much  so  that  it  has 
been  criticised  by  members  of  the  old-line  Revolutionary 
Marxian  school.  It  is  a  significant  fact  that  in  a  number 
of  respects  the  British  delegates  were  more  radical  than 
were  the  German  representatives.  Three  points  were 
conspicuously  brought  out  at  this,  the  largest  and  most 
representative  body  of  the  proletariat  of  the  world  ever 
assembled :  ( 1 )  the  ever-increasing  strength  of  the  So- 
cialist movement  in  all  countries;  (2)  its  growing  soli- 
darity; (3)  its  tendency  to  substitute  practical  Oppor- 
tunism for  idealistic  Revolutionary  "Scientific"  Marxian 
Socialism. 

The  International  Socialist  Bureau  was  instituted  in 
1900  as  the  permanent  Executive  Council  of  the  Inter- 
national Congress,  and  consists  of  two  representatives 
from  each  national  delegation  to  the  Congress,  together 
with  one  representative  from  the  Socialist  and  Labor 
Parliamentary  Parties  of  each  nation.  The  Chairman  is 
the  brilliant  Belgian  Socialist,  Emil  Yandervelde.  The 
Bureau  meets  annually  at  Brussels. 

In  connection  with  the  Congress  and  the  Bureau  there 
are  National  Committees  in  each  country. 

As  a  development  of  the  Congress  there  is  also  an 
European  Socialist  and  Labor  Inter-Parliamentary  Com- 
mittee. Its  purpose  is  to  keep  the  different  national  So- 
cialist and  Labor  Parliamentary  groups  in  touch  with 
each  other,  with  the  especial  object  of  taking  joint  action 
in  the  event  of  threatened  war  between  the  nations.  It 
is  understood  that  the  Inter-Parliamentary  groups  of 
Great  Britain,  France  and  Germany  exchanged  views 
during  the  "war  talk"  over  Morocco  in  the  summer  of 
19TT.  Tt  is  well-known  that  the  German  Social  Democ- 
racy— which    is    the    largest    political    "group"    in    the 


3io 


WHAT   IS    SOCIALISM? 


Fatherland — is  bitterly  opposed  to  the  militarism  and  bel- 
ligerency of  the  Kaiser ;  and  it  is  not  at  all  unlikely  that 
the  Imperial  knowledge  of  this  fact  had  something  to  do 
with  the  modification  of  the  demands  of  "the  War 
Lord."  In  the  official  year-book  of  the  English  Labor- 
Socialists  this  organization  is  referred  to  as  possibly  pos- 
sessing "the  germ  of  the  future  Parliament  of  the  United 
States  of  Europe."  In  1910,  14  nations  were  represented 
on  the  Inter-Parliamentary  Committee. 

Numerical  Strength  of  Socialism. 

The  official  year-book  of  the  Socialist-Labor  Party  of 
Great  Britain  for  191 1  gives  the  following  as  the  repre- 
sentation of  the  Socialists  and  "Laborites"  committed  to 
Socialism  in  the  different  Parliaments  of  the  world  by 
the  latest  returns : 


No. 

of  Soc. 

Total 

Percentage 

Socialist 

Country- 

and  Labor 

Members  in 

of  Soc.  and 

and  Labor 

Members. 

Parliament. 

Lab.  Members. 

Votes. 

Austria 

88 

5i6 

17.06 

1,041,948 

Finland 

86 

200 

43- 

3i6,95i 

France 

76 

595 

13-01 

1,106,047 

Germany 

53* 

397 

12.61 

3,258,968 

Italy 

42 

508 

8.26 

338,885 

Australia 

41 

75 

54-8 

678,012 

Great  Br 

itain 

40t 

670 

5-97 

529,193 

Belgium 

35 

166 

21.08 

483 ,24 1 

Sweden 

36 

165 

21.81 

75,000 

*  Eleven  seats  won  since  the  General  Election,  1907. 
t  General  Election,  January,  1910.    Fewer  candidates  were  run 
at  the  lax!  election,  December,  1910,  and  the  poll  was  consequently 
reduced,  though  the  average  vote  was  higher  and  the  representa- 
tion increased  from  40  to  42. 


THE   NEW    "INTERNATIONAL" 


3ii 


No. 
Country    aw 

M( 

of  Soc. 
J  Labor 
•mbers. 

Total 
Members  in 
Parliament. 

Percentage 
of  Soc.  and 
Lab.  Members. 

Socialist 
and  Labor 
Votes. 

Denmark             24 
Russia                 17 
Norway               1 1 
Luxemburg        10 
Greece                 10 
Holland                7 
Switzerland         7 
Turkey                 6 
Chili                      6 
Canada                  1 
Servia                   1 
Argentine              1 
Spain                     1 
United  States     1  * 

114 
442 
123 
48 
358 
100 
170 
196 
107 

213 
160 
120 
406 
291 

21. 

3.82 

8-94 

20.83 

2.8 

7.0 
4. II 
3.06 

5.6 

0.47 

0.62 

0.73 

0.24 

0.2 

98,721 

90,000 

82,494 
100,000 

18,000 

3.056 

10,000 

40,791 

800,000 

*  One  in  Congress  and  30  in  the  State  Legislatures,  elected  in 
1910. 

The  two  following  tables  are  taken  from  The  Socialist 
Annual  (London),  for  191 1: 


The  strength  of  Socialist  parties  on  Municipal  and  Communal 
Councils  is  as  follows   (so  far  as  known)  : 


No.  of 
Socialist 
Country  Councillors, 

Austria     2,896 

Belgium    850 

Bulgaria    ? 

Denmark     1,000 

England     1,126 

Finland   351 

France  3,800 


No.  of 
Socialist 
Country  Councillors. 

Germany  7.729 

ttaly   3,139 

Norway ?>y^ 

Servia    22 

Spain    150 

Sweden   125 


312 


WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 


The  Socialist  Press  of  various  countries  consists  of  the  fol- 
lowing organs : 

Periodi- 
Country.  Papers  for  cals  and 

No.  of      No.  of      Other    Women's      the     Comic       Re- 
Dailies.  Weeklies.  Papers.  Papers.  Youth     Papers,  views. 


Australia 
Austria 

(Inclu. 
Belgium 
Bulgaria 
Canada 
Denmark 
England 
Finland 
France 
Germany 
Greece 
Holland 
Hungary 
Italy 

Luxemburg  — 
Norway  8 

Poland  2 

Portugal  — 
Roumania  — 
Russia 

Servia  — 

Spain  i 

Sweden  8 

Switzerland  6 
U.    S.    A.       8 


—  2 

5  30 
Bohemia) 

6  9 

—  i 

2 

I 

II 

I 

41 
4 

i 

14 
7 

95 
i 


35 

4 

4 

76 

i 
i 

2 


16 

ii 

3 
i 

4 
ii 

3 
6 


4 
5 


12 


3 

3  (a  number  of  secret  publications) 

3  (a  number  of  secret  publications) 

I  2  —  —  — 


2 
2 

4 
39 


5 

4 

7 
8 


I 
5 


i 

2 
2 

I 
2 
I 
2 
I 
I 


I 
2 


(Since  the  above   table   was  compiled   several   new   papers   de- 
voted to  Socialism  have  started  in  the  United  States.) 


From  (lie  same  publication  is  taken  the  following  table 
of  the  number  of  organized  workers  in  the  different  coun- 
tries, according  to  the  latest  data  available: 


THE   NEW    "INTERNATIONAL" 


313 


Austria   (1909)*   .  .. 

•  •     484,693 

Australia     and      New 

Zealand  (1908)    .  . 

•  •     239,293 

Belgium   (1908)    .  .. 

. .     147.058 

Bosnia  (1910)   

4.470 

Bulgaria    (1908)     .. 

12,933 

Croatia   (1908)    .... 

4,520 

Denmark   (1909)    .. 

. .     120,195 

England   ( 1909)    . . . 

.  .  2,347,461 

Finland  (1908)   .... 

24,009 

France  (1908)   

•  •     715,576 

Germany  (1909)!  . . 

•  •  2,447,578 

Holland    (1909)    145,000 

Hungary  (1909)   85,266 

Italy  (1909)   598,360 

Norway  (1909)   43J99 

Servia  (1909)    4,800 

Spain  ( 1009)    40,984 

Sweden  (1009)   219,000 

Switzerland  (1908)   ..  113,800 

U.  S.  A.  (1908)  1,588,000 


About 9,750,000 


*  Including  nearly  70,000  Czech  "Separatists." 
t  Including    270,751     Christians     (Catholics),     108,028    Hirsch- 
Duncker   (Liberal),  and  236,132  Independent  and  Local. 


CHAPTER    XIII 

CONCLUSION:    A    CRITICISM 

The  conclusion  of  the  whole  matter  is  that  Socialism, 
in  its  "ultimate  aim,"  is  only  a  dream.  To  millions  of 
weary  toilers  it  is  as  alluring  as 

"One  of  those  passing  rainbow  dreams" ; 

but  to  others  it  is  a  spectre  of  the  night — "black,  fearful, 
comfortless  and  horrible."  The  convinced  Socialist  may 
concede,  for  the  sake  of  argument,  perhaps,  that  the  ulti- 
mate goal  of  his  creed  is  a  dream ;  still  he  pleads  that  the 
dream  of  to-day  is  the  fact  of  to-morrow.  But  dreams 
are  unsubstantial  things,  and  a  wise  man  has  said : 
"Ground  not  upon  dreams,  you  know  they  are  ever  con- 
trary !" 

There  has  never  existed  a  true  Socialist  State,  a  Col- 
lective Commonwealth;  and,  judging  the  future  by  the 
past,  and  giving  due  consideration  to  natural  law  and  to 
human  nature,  it  is  safe  to  say  that  there  never  will  be 
one.  This  does  not  mean  that  there  will  not  be  attempts 
made  t<>  bring  about  the  thing  called  Socialism,  for 
"Utopia"  still  i  in  nnii's  imagination.      Neither  docs 

it  mean  that  many  of  the  "immediate  demands"  of  So- 
cialism arc  not  desirable  as  well  as  practicable. 

Socialism     that  i^  Collectivism — is  bound  to  prove  its 

3M 


CONCLUSION:    A    CRITICISM  315 

case  before  any  sane-minded  nation  will  make  the  leap 
in  the  dark,  although  it  is  quite  possible  that  some  coun- 
tries,  through  weak,  demagogic  and  foolish  politicians, 
may  lie  drawn  perilously  near  the  brink  of  the  precipice. 
Most  Socialists  profess  to  believe  in  Darwinism;  but 
the  Socialist  creed  is  absolutely  opposed  to  the  first  prin- 
ciples of  Darwin,  unless  it  be  held  that  the  fate  of  the 
human  race  is  death  from  dry  rot — for  that  would  be  the 
inevitable  result  of  a  persistence  in  Collectivism.  The 
1  Jarwinian  law  of  "the  survival  of  the  fittest"  may  be  a 
cruel  one,  like  the  law  of  death  itself,  but  all  the  resolu- 
tions of  the  "International"  to  the  end  of  time  will  not 
affect  that  law  one  tittle.  It  is  a  law  of  nature  that  life 
is  a  continual  struggle  from  birth  to  death ;  without 
struggle  and  restless  movement  there  can  be  no  healthy 
;\n(]  vigorous  life ;  but  Socialism  means  stagnation,  and 
under  natural  law  there  can  be  only  one  result — paralysis 
and  death!  Socialists  appeal  to  the  tribal  relations  and 
the  village  communities  as  historical  proofs  of  the  natu- 
ral status  of  the  theory  of  Collectivism ;  but  as  pointed  out 
I  v  F.  \Y.  Headley  in  Darwinism  and  Modern  Socialism, 
the  old  form  of  tribal  and  village  Socialism  did  not  come 
in  conflict  with  Darwinian  principles:  it  did  not  check 
the  elimination  of  the  unfit ;  while  "the  new  Socialism 
aims  at  putting  a  stop  to  the  struggle  for  existence  alto- 
gether.  There  is  to  be,  if  not  a  luxurious,  yet  a  soft  en- 
vironment for  all."  If  monopoly  has  stilled  individual 
initiative  and  enterprise,  the  remedy  is  not  Industrial  Col- 
lectivism, but  such  an  adjustment  and  regulation  of  af- 
fairs as  will  restore  true  competition  and  Individualism, 
by  establishing  a  relative  equality  of  opportunity.  In- 
dustrial Collectivism  would  be  more  destructive  to  indi- 
vidual vigor  and  manly  independence  and  human  happi- 


316  WHAT   IS    SOCIALISM? 

ness   than   is   the   modern    monster    Monopoly.     Again 
quoting-  the  author  of  Darwinism  and  Modern  Socialism: 

The  history  of  the  human  race  has  been  the  history  of 
effort,  of  struggle  against  difficulties,  hardships,  and  enemies. 
Socialism,  which  has  been  well  called  the  philosophy  of  fail- 
ure, means  submission  to  difficulties.  It  preaches  the  help- 
lessness of  the  individual  and  the  omnipotence  of  the  State. 
The  citizens  are  to  be,  each  of  them,  so  much  concrete  weak- 
ness and  helplessness,  but  somehow  the  State,  though  com- 
posed of  such  men  and  women,  is  to  be,  beyond  all  experi- 
ence of  governments,  strenuous  and  capable.  Such  a  system 
has  only  to  be  tried  in  its  complete  form  and  it  must  prove  at 
once   a   disastrous   failure. 


The  progress  of  Society  has  been  gradual,  and  the 
present  system  has  unknown  ages  back  of  it ;  but  imper- 
fect as  it  is,  there  is  no  warrant  for  the  assumption  that 
its  improvement  will,  in  the  main,  be  along  any  other 
lines  than  those  which  have  gone  before ;  nevertheless, 
there  is  ground  for  the  confident  hope  and  expectation 
that  these  lines  will  be  straighter  and  smoother  than  for- 
merly, and  that  the  rate  and  extent  and  scope  of  the  im- 
provements will  continually  increase.  It  is  proposed  by 
Socialists  to  substitute  for  the  present  long-tested  system 
one  that  is  utterly  untried  in  its  fulness  of  conception, 
and  the  partial  experiments  of  which  have  all  finally 
proven  failures,  in  all  ages  and  under  all  conditions.  In 
cases  where  there  has  been  even  approximate  temporary 
success  in  these  partial  experiments,  they  have  been 
based  on  slavery  of  the  body  or  of  the  mind — sometimes 
both — the  Socialism  of  Classic  Athens  representing  the 
former  and  that  of  Utopia  the  other. 

Socialism,  in  its  full  concept — as  dreamed  of  by  its  dev- 


CONCLUSION:    A    CRITICISM  317 

otees — can  never  be  a  success  until  human  nature  has 
been  abolished. 

Socialists  point  to  the  ever-widening  sphere  of  State 
activities  as  a  demonstration  of  the  immanence  and  prac- 
ticability of  Collectivism.  But  they  fail  to  recognize 
that  to  these  activities  there  are  limitations,  both  in  na- 
ture and  degree.  Leaving  out  of  consideration  such 
matters  as  public  schools,  parks,  baths,  drainage,  etc. 
(about  which  there  is  no  controversy),  the  State  or 
Municipality  can  only  handle  with  advantage  such  under- 
takings as  are  simple  and  uniform  in  their  operation  and 
administration,  and  that  are  non-industrial. 

Furthermore,  these  undertakings  are  wholly  or  sub- 
stantially to  be  classed  as  natural  monopolies,  such  as 
water,  light,  carrying  the  mails,  transportation  (railways, 
street  cars),  or  general  communication  (telegraphs,  tele- 
phones) ;  and  it  is  to  be  observed  that  even  some  of  these, 
designated  as  natural  monopolies,  can  be  operated  by 
private  corporations  at  least  as  well  as  by  the  State,  under 
certain  conditions ;  and  indeed,  there  are  conditions  under 
which  it  would  be  very  unwise  for  the  State  or  for  Muni- 
cipalities to  undertake  their  operation.  It  should  be 
particularly  noted  that  most  of  the  undertakings  now 
operated  by  the  State  with  a  measurable  degree  of  suc- 
cess and  satisfaction,  belong  to  a  class  of  necessities  or 
conveniences,  or  ethical  or  artistic  wants  of  Society, 
which  are  quite  apart  from  Industrialism ;  and  it  should 
be  remembered  that  the  argument  for  Socialism,  as  re- 
gards its  economic  side,  is  based  entirely  on  changing  the 
present  private  industrial  system  to  Collectivism. 

Socialists  also  neglect  to  note  that  many  of  the  enter- 
prises in  which  the  State  is  active  are  entirely  new,  not 
only  in  form,  but  in  conception  and  sphere  of  service. 


318  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

To  a  great  extent  State  Socialism,  so-called,  is  not  the 
substitution  of  communal  ownership  for  private  owner- 
ship, but  is  the  establishment  and  operation  by  the  State 
for  the  common  good  of  undertakings  which  had  never 
existed  before,  many  of  these  being  on  entirely  new  ideas 
of  human  endeavor,  let  alone  of  public  activity ;  and  none 
of  these  undertakings,  it  must  again  be  pointed  out,  are 
of  an  industrial,  productive  nature,  properly  speaking. 

But  directly  the  State  or  Municipality  undertakes  in- 
dustrial productive  enterprises  it  steps  outside  the  limita- 
tions of  its  competency.     There  is  no  experience  to  sus- 
tain the  contention  of  Socialists  that  the  State  can  suc- 
cessfully undertake  manufacturing,  commercial,  or  trad- 
ing enterprises,  or  even   cultivate   the  land  collectively 
with  advantage.     All  the  evidence  points  the  other  way. 
This  is  true  even  under  the  present  system  of  society, 
where  a  failure  in  such  an  attempt  is  largely  neutralized 
by  the  general  elasticity  of  the  conditions  and  the  recuper- 
ative powers  of  the  community.     But  under  the  opera- 
tions of  tbe  proposed  Co-operative  Commonwealth,  there 
would  be  no  such  elasticity  or  recuperative  power.     The 
State  machine  would  be  deadly  in  its  destruction  of  the 
very  mainsprings  of  human  activity  and  inspiration.     Im- 
perfect as  is  the  modern  system  of  Industrialism,  it  obeys 
certain   natural   laws   which   operate   successfully   in   the 
main  in  correcting  iniMal.cs;  but  were  Universal  Indus- 
trialism  undertaken   by  the   State,   the  very  vastness  of 
the  scheme  and  the  minute  and  uncountable  complicated 
parN  of  the  mechanism  of  executive  control  and  adminis- 
tration would  inevitably  cause  the  system  to  be  unrespon- 
sive to  corrective  natural  laws,  and  finally  to  break  down. 
While  the  State   is  ever  broadening  and  increasing  its 

activities,   yet   it   does   not   produce  ivealth;   it   simply 


CONCLUSION:   A   CRITICISM  319 

spends  wealth  created  under  the  existing  system  of  so- 
called  Capitalism — of  individual  enterprise  and  compe- 
tition. It  is  true  that  Socialists  have  a  list  of  enterprises 
which  they  label  "Socialism  in  the  Making"— in  which, 
with  triumphant  exultation  recent  State  or  Municipal 
undertakings  are  pointed  to  as  evidence  of  the  practica- 
hility  of  Collectivism.  It  is  to  be  observed  that  the  great 
majority  of  these  undertakings  come  under  the  category 
of  public  benevolences  or  "public  utilities ;"  and  the 
former  are  admittedly  permanently  non-productive  and 
are  always  drains  upon  the  public  treasury,  while  the 
latter  are  examples  of  State  or  Municipal  Socialism,  such 
as  the  public  ownership  and  operation  of  railroads,  water- 
works, street  railroads,  etc.,  which  are,  in  their  very  na- 
ture, monopolies,  and  which  frequently  are  run  at  a  loss, 
and  oftentimes  not  so  efficiently  as  similar  undertakings 
are  by  private  corporations.  And,  by  way  of  passing,  it 
might  be  remarked  that  these  State  and  .Municipal  activi- 
ties are  repudiated  by  real  Socialists  as  examples  of  true 
Collectivism.  Iiut  very  few  of  the  enterprises  referred 
to  can  be  claimed  as  productive  industries;  and  such  as 
may  be  claimed  so  to  be,  are  of  the  simplest  nature,  and 
are  all  mere  experiments,  with  all  the  precedents  of  his- 
tory against  the  presumption  of  permanent  success.  Of 
course,  there  may  he  occasional  instances  in  which,  under 
abnormal  conditions,  and  particularly  under  the  stress 
of  a  sudden  unexpected  national  necessity  or  calamity, 
the  State  might  with  propriety  and  even  advantage,  en- 
gage temporarily  in  an  industrial  productive  enterprise; 
but  even  then,  experience  has  shown  that  the  State  is  not 
a  successful  manager  of  a  manufacturing  enterprise. 
Occasionally  the  State  has  to  avail  itself  of  Martial  Law, 
but  the  normal  condition  of  every  free  community  must 


320  WHAT   IS    SOCIALISM? 

be  under  ordinary  Civil  Law.  Socialists  can  be  chal- 
lenged to  produce  a  single  instance  of  real  Industrial 
Collectivism  applied  to  any  complicated  modern  "social- 
ized" manufacturing  enterprise  which  has  stood  the  test 
of  time.  It  is  impossible  to  definitely  set  the  limit  to  the 
State's  activity,  but  in  a  general  way  it  may  be  set  down 
that  the  State  should  not  invade  the  field  of  productive 
enterprise.  This  is  the  major  field  of  human  activities  ; 
all  others  are  the  minor.  Notwithstanding  the  extending 
field  of  State  and  Municipal  Socialism,  it  is  safe  to  say 
that  for  all  time  most  of  the  work  of  the  world  will  con- 
tinue to  be  performed  by  individuals  under  private  enter- 
prise ;  although  it  is  quite  reasonable  to  assume  that  the 
State  will  in  the  future — and  in  the  near  future — have 
more  to  say  as  to  the  relations  between  the  worker  and 
the  Capitalist  than  it  now  has ;  and,  in  addition,  it  is  to 
be  expected  and  hoped  that  the  day  is  not  far  distant 
when  these  relations  will  be  so  changed  and  modified  by 
voluntary  and  unofficial  agreement  as  will  make  the  lot 
of  the  toiler  much  more  satisfactory  than  it  is  at  present. 

When  Socialists  declaim  against  the  alleged  tyranny  of 
the  present  so-called  "Capitalistic"  Governments,  they 
forget  that  these  very  Governments  allow  them  to  preach 
Socialism  and  to  organize  to  overthrow  them  ;  so,  also, 
when  they  boast  of  the  increasing  number  of  State  and 
Municipal  Socialist  enterprises  they  lose  sight  of  the  fact 
that  it  is  the  private  tax-payers — who  get  their  money 
through  the  Capitalistic  system — who  make  possible 
these  examples  of  Socialism,  such  as  they  are.  Under 
Socialism,  the  well  springs  of  National  prosperity  would 
dry  up,  and  individual  pauperism  would  become  uni- 
versal 

(  >ne  of  the  greatest  of  England's  Radicals — a  man  be- 


CONCLUSION:    A    CRITICISM  321 

loved  of  the  common  people  because  of  his  devotion  to 
their  interests — was  Charles  Bradlaugh.  He  was  pre- 
eminently a  Social  Reformer,  but  he  was  no  Socialist,  as 
the  term  is  now  understood.  He  strenuously  took  the 
position,  by  voice  and  pen,  that  Socialism  meant  Na- 
tional and  individual  suicide.  He  pointed  out  the  one 
great  overwhelming  objection  to  the  system  in  saying: 

If  Socialism  could  be  realized,  then  it  would  be  fatal  to  all 
progress  by  neutralizing  and  paralyzing  individual  effort,  and 
here  I  say  that  civilization  has  only  been  in  proportion  to  the 
energy  of  individuals. 

As  civilization  has  revolted  against  the  old  "Manches- 
ter school"  of  extreme  Individualism,  so  it  will  refuse  to 
accept  the  other  extreme,  that  of  Collectivism ;  it  will 
distinguish  between  Social  Reform  and  Socialism. 

Modern  Socialists  are  prone  to  ascribe  to  the  State 
some  mystical  omniscience,  omnipotence  and  moral  per- 
fection. They  ignore  the  fact  that  the  State  is  but  an 
instrument,  that  before  the  State,  the  individual  was,  and 
that  the  potentiality  and  beneficence  of  the  State  depend 
altogether  upon  the  people  composing  it. 

It  has  been  well  said  that  Socialists  are  ultra-Pessi- 
mists as  to  the  present,  and  ultra-Optimists  as  to  the 
future.  They  are  blind  to  the  ever-multiplying  evi- 
dences of  amelioration  all  around  them,  and  are  fanatical 
enthusiasts  over  the  prospects  of  a  coming  heaven  upon 
earth  founded  upon  the  unsubstantial  fabric  of  a  dream. 
The  success  of  Socialism  pre-snpposes  that  human  nature 
will  become  angelic;  but  when  that  time  comes,  there  will 
be  no  necessity  for  Socialism  or  any  other  "ism,"  for 
mankind  will  then  have  left  this  earth  and  become  inhab- 
itants of  Paradise  itself. 


322  WHAT   IS    SOCIALISM? 

To  a  certain  class  of  men,  the  very  indefmiteness  of 
Socialism  is  an  attraction — and  some  expositors  claim 
that  this  vagueness  is  not  only  a  matter  of  course,  but  is 
one  of  the  strong  attributes  of  the  theory ;  but  it  is  a 
stumbling  block  to  the  candid  and  thoughtful  student. 

In  its  economic  phase  "the  alpha  and  omega"  of  Social- 
ism is  the  communal  ownership  and  operation  of  the 
means  of  production,  distribution  and  exchange — or 
"capital;"  but  within  recent  years  there  has  been  an  ap- 
preciation on  the  part  of  many  of  the  leaders  of  the  move- 
ment of  the  necessity  of  conceding  that  the  individual 
must  be  allowed  to  privately  own  not  only  natural  and 
manufactured  products  for  his  personal  use  and  comfort, 
and  that  he  must  also  be  permitted  to  own  certain 
"means  of  production ;"  for  instance,  some  Socialists 
freely  admit  that  a  man  should  be  allowed  to  own  a  jack- 
knife,  and  to  use  it  as  a  means  of  production,  and  that  a 
woman  should  be  permitted  to  count  a  needle  and  even 
a  sewing-machine  among  her  personal  property !  The 
one  Simon-pure  Marxian  Revolutionary  Socialist  who 
was  elected  to  the  British  Parliament  in  the  tidal-wave  a 
few  years  ago  was  Victor  Grayson.  At  a  public  meeting 
during  his  campaign  a  "heckler"  asked  him,  "Do  you  be-, 
lieve  in  private  property?"  and  his  answer  was,  "I  would 
nationalize  the  means  of  production,  but  a  man  would 
keep  his  tooth-brush  and  tooth-pick !"  The  Socialists 
have  been  so  hard  pressed  upon  this  phase  of  the  ques- 
tion, that  the  necessity  of  "hedging"  has  been  forced 
upon  them;  and  the  latter-day  explanation  is  that  "the 
means  of  production"  to  be  owned  by  the  State  under 
Collectivism  would  be  only  those  that  are  employed  in 
"socialized"  industries — that  is,  those  which  require  the 
combined   labor   of   a   number   of  groups   of    workmen. 


CONCLUSION:    A    CRITICISM  323 

But,  except  in  regard  to  the  simplest  things,  every  indus- 
trial product  is  the  result  of  "socialized"  labor,  to  a 
greater  or  less  extent,  in  these  days  of  the  sub-division 
of  labor.  Reflection  will  clearly  show  that  it  is  abso- 
lutely impossible  to  draw  a  line  of  distinction. 

There  is  equally  the  same  difficulty  in  the  attempt  to 
define  and  limit  what  is  called  "Capital."  Any  man  who 
possesses  anything  above  his  actual  needs  which  another 
man  wants  and  for  which  the  latter  is  willing  to  give 
anything  else  (including  his  labor),  is  to  that  extent  a 
"Capitalist."  It  is  claimed  that  the  establishment  of  the 
Collectivist  Commonwealth  would  mark  the  extinction 
of  Capitalism ;  but  the  probabilities  are  that  it  would  be 
but  the  beginning  of  a  new  craze  for  private  possessions, 
eventuating  in  the  birth  of  a  new  race  of  capitalists, 
who  would  at  first  operate  secretly  and  in  a  small  way, 
but  would  in  time  openly  defy  the  Commonwealth  and 
branch  out  on  a  large  scale.  They  would  commence 
by  saving  and  hoarding,  and  after  a  while  they  would 
have  accumulated  a  large  quantity  of  excess  goods  and 
money, — if  the  Commonwealth  used  money — which  is 
a  matter  much  in  dispute  among  Socialists  themselves. 
No  law  on  earth  could  stop  them  from  doing  so, — the 
history  of  the  Jews  under  cruel  repressive  laws  demon- 
strates that — and  no  law  on  earth  could  prevent  other 
men  from  exchanging  their  own  accumulated  goods  or 
money,  or  even  from  working  for  a  wage  or  return  in 
"kind."  Hence,  there  would  inevitably  be  a  return  to 
Capitalism    and    a    wage-earning    class. 

In  its  very  essence,  Collectivism,  in  its  full  concep- 
tion, must  be  monopolistic :  the  State  would,  as  a  mat- 
ter of  necessity,  use  all  of  its  authority  to  prevent  com- 
petition from  private  individuals;  therefore,  from  purely 


324  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

economic  reasons — apart  from  others — there  would 
develop  a  clash  bet'.een  the  supporters  of  the  In- 
dustrial Commonwealth  and  those  favoring  individual 
enterprise.  On  the  part  of  Socialists  there  is  a  most 
amazing  conviction  that  when  their  Collectivist  State  had 
been  ushered  in,  there  would  at  once  be  a  cessation  to  all 
agitation — that  the  end  of  the  struggle  of  mankind  to 
improve  their  condition  had  been  reached.  But  ever 
since  man  evoluted  from  the  lowest  depths  of  savagery, 
he  has  been  afflicted  with  "divine  discontent,"  and  there 
is  no  reason  for  supposing  that  he  would  lose  this  char- 
acteristic under  the  reign  of  King  Demos. 

In  addition  to  these  opposing  economic  forces,  there 
would  inevitably  grow  up  an  ever-increasing  antagonism 
to  the  Socialist  State  based  on  the  ineradicable  love  of 
personal  liberty.  Individualism  would  be  bound  to  assert 
itself.  Men  would  never  permanently  accept  without 
protest  a  despotism  greater  than  that  of  the  Russian 
Czars,  merely  because  it  was  labelled  "Socialism."  And 
the  State,  to  be  effective  in  its  role  of  the  Universal, 
Monopolistic,  Exclusive  Employer  and  Boss,  would  have 
to  be  despotic ;  it  could  not  with  safety  to  its  own  exist- 
ence be  tolerant  to  minorities  or  opposition  of  any  kind ; 
and  being  despotic,  it  would  work  its  own  doom.  In 
fact,  even  now,  in  its  attitude  toward  opposition,  Social- 
ism is  arrogantly  intolerant.  Socialists,  as  a  rule,  are 
conspicuous  for  their  unfairness  and  self-sufficiency  in 
controversy.     They  allow  no  one  to  differ  from  them. 

Even  the  latter-day  "trimming"  apologists  of  Socialism 
who  deny  that  it  lias  anything  to  do  with  religion  or 
ethics,  admit  or  boast  that  it  means  far  more  than  a  mere 
change  of  employers — from  the  Capitalist  to  the  State. 
In    its    full   conception,  even   economically,   Collectivism 


CONCLUSION:    A   CRITICISM  325 

implies  a  new  and  fundamental  change  in  every-day  life 
in  the  relations  of  the  individual  toward  other  individuals 
and  toward  the  State,  and  inversely  so.  The  State  would 
either  be  a  tyrannical  task-master  or  a  dole-giver;  if  the 
first,  it  would  be  hated ;  in  the  latter  case  it  would  be 
soon  "sucked  dry."  From  either  point  of  view,  Collec- 
tivism would  be  bound  to  collapse — either  through  as- 
saults from  without  or  through  its  own  inherent  weak- 
ness and  lack  of  substance. 

The  natural  tendency  would  be  for  the  Socialist  State 
— the  triumphant  majority,  for  the  time  being — to  be 
despotic  and  to  be  indifferent  to  the  views  and  rights  of 
the  minority.  No  writer  in  the  English  language  has  a 
greater  right  to  be  accepted  as  an  authoritative  exponent 
of  pure,  unadulterated  Marxian  Collectivism  than  Mr. 
Bel  fort  Bax,  and  in  his  Ethics  of  Socialism  that  gentle- 
man lays  it  down  that — 

The  only  public  opinion,  the  only  will  of  the  majority, 
which  has  any  sort  of  claim  on  the  recognition  of  the  Social- 
ist in  the  present  day,  is  that  of  the  majority  of  those  who 
have  like  aspirations  with  him,  who  have  a  definite  conscious- 
ness of  certain  aims — in  other  words,  the  will  of  the  majority 
of  the  European  Socialist  party. 

.  .  The  practical  question  finally  presents  itself:  What 
is  the  duty  of  the  convinced  Socialist  towards  the  present 
mechanical  majority — say  of  the  English  nation — a  majority 
mainly  composed  of  human  cabbage-stalks,  the  growth  of  the 
suburban  villa  and  the  slum,  respectively?  The  answer  is, 
Make  use  of  it  wherever  possible  without  loss  of  principle, 
but  where  this  is  not  possible  disregard  it.  Tbe  Socialist  has 
a  distinct  aim  in  view.  If  he  can  carry  the  initial  stages 
towards  its  realization  by  means  of  the  count-of-heads  ma- 
jority, by  all  means  let  him  do  so.  If,  on  the  other  hand, 
he  sees  the  possibility  of  carrying  a  salient  portion  of  his 
programme  by  tramping  on  this  majority,  by  all  means  let 
him  do  this  also. 


326  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

No  old  fossilized  Tory  member  of  the  hereditary  British 
House  of  Lords  ever  gave  expression  to  such  undemo- 
cratic sentiments ;  and  yet  Mr.  Bax  is  the  great  literary 
expounder  of  the  doctrines  of  the  British  Social  Demo- 
cratic Party,  the  repository  of  the  undiluted  and  un- 
tainted full-fledged  Marxism ! 

No  class  of  people  are  louder  in  demanding  their 
"rights"  than  are  the  Socialists,  but  this  is  how  they  will 
treat  opposition  when  they  get  into  power,  according  to 
another  "intellectual"  advocate,  Prof.  Karl  Pearson,  in 
The  Ethics  of  Free-thought: 

Socialists  have  to  inculcate  that  spirit  which  would  give 
offenders  against  the  State  short  shrift  and  the  nearest  lamp- 
post. 

Sidney  Webb  is  accepted  in  both  America  and  England 
as  entitled  to  speak  for  Socialism.  He  is  frank  enough 
to  acknowledge  (Fabian  Tracts,  No.  51)  as  to  conditions 
under  Collectivism: 

If  a  man  wants  freedom  to  work  or  not  to  work  just  as  he 
likes,  he  had  better  emigrate  to  Robinson  Crusoe's  island,  or 
else  become  a  millionaire.  To  suppose  that  the  industrial 
affairs  of  a  complicated  industrial  State  can  be  run  without 
strict  subordination  and  discipline,  without  obedience  to 
orders,  and  without  definite  allowances  for  maintenance,  is 
to  dream  not  of  Socialism  but  of  Anarchism. 

So,  likewise,  that  even  more  brilliant  Socialist,  H.  G. 
Wells  (Fortnightly  Review,  November,  1906),  contro- 
verts the  assumption  of  some  enthusiasts  that  "natural 
impulses  and  the  native  goodness  of  man"  will  be  suffi- 
cient to  run  the  affairs  of  the  Industrial  Commonwealth. 


CONCLUSION:    A    CRITICISM  327 

Mr.  II.  M.  Hyndman  is  a  graduate  of  Oxford,  is  the 
founder  of  the  British  Social  Democratic  Party,  and  has 
given  his  private  fortune  and  all  his  life  to  propagating 
and  defending  the  principles  of  Revolutionary  Socialism. 
He  does  not  indulge  in  the  delusion  so  common  among 
working  men  that  Collectivism  is  another  name  for  "Lib- 
erty Hall,"  where  every  man  will  be  permitted  to  do  just 
as  he  likes,  or  do  nothing  if  such  be  his  will,  and  get  well 
paid  for  doing  anything  or  nothing.  In  a  lecture  in 
London  in  1904  on  "Social  Democracy,"  Mr.  Hyndman 
said : 

But  do  not  let  us  forget  that  in  so  far  as  this  tends  simply 
to  State  control  it  may  mean  the  control  of  a  bureaucracy 
and  the  domination  of  experts.  That  entails  with  it  a  sort 
of  qualified  slavery. 

.  .  .  There  is  no  more  offensive  prig  than  a  bureaucrat, 
none  more  wholly  impervious  to  reason  when  his  conceit  of 
himself  is  threatened. 

The  learned  Prof.  Flint,  of  Edinburgh,  is  not  a  Social- 
ist, but  he  is  admittedly  a  fair  critic.  He  declares  (So- 
cialism, pp.  373  and  374)  : 

Socialism  of  its  very  nature  so  absorbs  the  individual  in 
society  as  to  sacrifice  his  rights  to  its  authority.  ...  It 
denies  to  the  individual  any  rights  independent  of  society,  and 
assigns  to  society  authority  to  do  whatever  it  deems  for  its 
own  good  with  the  persons,  faculties,  and  possessions  of  indi- 
viduals. It  undertakes  to  relieve  individuals  of  what  are 
manifestly  their  own  moral  responsibilities,  and  proposes  to 
deprive  them  of  the  means  of  fulfilling  them.  It  would  place 
the  masses  of  mankind  completely  at  the  mercy  of  a  com- 
paratively small  and  highly  centralized  body  of  organizers 
and  administrators  entrusted  with  such  powers  as  no  human 
hands  can  safely  or  righteously  wield. 


328  WHAT   IS    SOCIALISM? 

Dr.  Schaffle,  the  Austrian  economist,  whose  Quintes- 
sence of  Socialism  is  a  classic  accepted  by  Socialists 
themselves,  points  out  in  that  remarkable  exposition  of 
Marxism  that  under  Collectivism  (which  he  afterwards 
demonstrated  was  an  impossibility) — "The  producers 
would  still  be,  individually,  no  more  than  workmen. 
.  .  .  The  only  difference  would  be  that  they  would 
be  completely  at  the  mercy  of  their  foremen." 

The  individual  would  find  that  not  only  would  he  be 
limited  to  one  employer — the  State,  or  the  Collective 
Commonwealth,  or  the  Committee  of  Administration  of 
Things,  or  whatever  might  be  the  name  of  the  Com- 
munal authority — but  that  his  personal  liberty  was  all 
gone.  He  would  be  labelled  and  numbered  and  bar- 
racked ;  he  would  be  shorn  of  all  individuality ;  he  would 
be  watched,  reported  upon,  registered  and  inspected ;  his 
goings  out  and  incomings  would  all  be  recorded ;  he 
would  have  to  accept  whatever  uniform  the  Bureau  on 
Dress  prescribed  for  him ;  he  would  have  to  take  lean 
meat  when  he  wanted  fat,  and  mutton  when  he  preferred 
beef;  if  he  desired  a  change  of  climate  he  would  have 
to  make  dutiful  request  for  it,  and  would  not  dare  to  go 
away  unless  he  secured  permission ;  he  would  have  to 
work  in  a  foundry  when  he  wanted  to  be  a  carpenter ;  he 
would  be  discontented  because  his  neighbor  had  a  better 
house  to  live  in  than  the  Committee  had  assigned  to  him ; 
he  could  not  own  anything  without  a  license;  he  could 
not  do  an  odd  job  to  earn  a  little  extra  money  ;  he  would 
not  be  allowed  to  trade  off  or  sell  anything;  he  could  not 
do  anything  of  his  own  free  will  except — Revolt!  And 
revolt  he  would.  The  pendulum  would  swing  from  the 
slavishness  of  Collectivism  to  the  unrestrained  freedom 
of  absolute  Individualism — Anarchy  I     And  if  he  failed 


CONCLUSION:    A    CRITICISM  329 

in  his  rebellion,  Absolutism  would  be  enthroned.     Such 
would  be  the  ultimate  end  of  Socialism! 

Socialism  is  an  impossibility  for  two  reasons — and 
many  others  might  be  named,  but  these  are  sufficient : 

(1)  It  could  never  be  established.  The  wisest  of 
Marxians  have  utterly  failed — some  admittedly — to  elu- 
cidate how  the  private  productive  property  of  a  nation 
could  be  turned  into  collective  property ;  and  it  should  be 
kept  in  mind  that  according  to  its  very  nature,  Socialism, 
even  from  a  theoretical  standpoint,  must  be  world-wide 
to  be  logical  and  successful.  If  the  State  attempted  the 
transfer  of  property  or  capital  by  confiscation  there 
would  be  civil  war ;  if  it  attempted  honest  payment,  bank- 
ruptcy would  follow. 

(2)  It  could  never  be  administered.  The  State  would 
be  utterly  unable  to  keep  the  gigantic  machinery  of  mod- 
ern Industrialism  going.  No  official  bureau  would  be 
vast  enough  or  efficient  enough  to  do  the  bookkeeping 
required,  to  decide  upon  the  quantity  and  quality,  the  na- 
ture and  style  of  the  different  products,  and  to  meet  the 
infinite  variety  of  tastes  and  necessities  of  the  citizens. 
Wither  could  any  Collectivist  system  be  devised  to  satis- 
factorily assign  labor  according  to  its  ability  or  prefer- 
ence, or  to  provide  for  its  equitable  compensation.  It  is 
inconceivable  that  there  would  not  be  favoritism  in  as- 
signments to  labor ;  and  there  would  inevitably  be  in- 
equality and  injustice  in  compensation. 

There  is  no  force  in  the  Socialist  reply  to  these  objec- 
tions, that  citizens  now-a-days  have  satisfactory  relations 
with  the  State  in  regard  to  official  positions :  for  they 
enter  the  Government  service  of  their  own  free-will  and 


330  WHAT    IS    SOCIALISM? 

accord,  and  if  they  do  not  like  it  they  are  at  perfect  lib- 
erty to  resign  and  to  enter  the  service  of  a  private  indi- 
vidual or  a  private  corporation ;  but  under  Collectivism 
there  would  be  only  one  employer,  one  buyer  of  Labor — 
the  State;  and  if  the  citizen  were  unsatisfied  with  either 
his  assignment  to  labor  or  his  compensation,  he  would 
have  no  remedy,  as  there  would  be  no  position  open  to 
him  outside  the  State. 

But  even  though  Collectivism  in  its  full  conception 
could  be  established  and  administered,  it  would  be  a 
calamity  past  description.  It  would  be  contrary  to  and 
eternally  antagonistic  to  human  nature.  All  Individual- 
ism would  be  killed ;  the  private  understanding  and  con- 
ception of  things  would  be  absolutely  destroyed ;  and  the 
individual  would  become  the  mere  creature,  the  slave,  of 
the  State.  There  could  be  no  appeal  from  Caesar :  What- 
ever the  State  decreed,  that  the  citizen  must  do;  instead 
of  the  State  being  an  aggregation  of  individual  units,  it 
would  be  One  Indivisible  Whole,  composed  of  indistin- 
guishable human  atoms ;  the  State  would  be  the  Monopo- 
listic Task-master  and  Employer— the  Universal  Buyer 
and  Seller,  the  Arbiter  of  Fashion,  and  the  Sole  Custo- 
dian of  Life  and  Liberty.  All  individual  freedom  would 
be  gone,  for  the  State  would  not — and  could  not  for  its 
own  safety — tolerate  any  interference  with  its  absolute 
and  sovereign  prerogatives.  To  protest  peaceably  would 
be  impossible,  for  the  State  would  own  all  the  printing 
prases  type  and  paper,  and  the  other  accessories  of  pub- 
lication; ami  the  State  would  never  permit  its  own  prop- 
erty to  be  used  for  its  own  destruction.  Necessarily,  no 
book,  no  magazine,  no  pamphlet,  no  newspaper,  no  leaf- 
let, could  be  printed  without  having  passed  the  govern- 


CONCLUSION:    A    CRITICISM  331 

mcnt  censor ;  and  the  same  is  true  of  all  messages  by  the 
telegraph  and  telephone  systems,  for  the  State  would 
own  all  these. 

Ethically,  the  establishment  of  Socialism  would  be  the 
greatest  misfortune  which  could  overtake  the  human 
race.  It  would  entirely  extinguish  all  those  qualities 
which  have  distinguished  the  most  progressive  and  civil- 
ized nations :  individuality,  personal  responsibility  and 
independence,  the  spirit  of  self-help  and  self-reliance, 
thrift,  industry,  initiative,  enterprise,  persistence,  ambi- 
tion, hope,  patriotism,  courage.  It  would  make  of  the 
citizens  a  horde  of  lazy,  hopeless  and  dissatisfied  paupers, 
as  already  is  the  tendency  manifesting  itself  under  the 
operation  of  the  dole-giving  poor-law  and  non-contribu- 
tory pension  system  now  in  full  blast  in  England.  There 
the  working  class  have  become  inoculated  with  the 
wretched  and  character-destroying  poison  that  the  State 
is  the  Universal  Provider.  A  nation  which  adopts  this 
as  its  ideal  must  inevitably  perish  from  the  face  of  the 
earth,  and  deservedly  so.  It  would  likely  starve  to 
death,  or  its  people  would  become  the  under-strappers  or 
even  slaves  of  some  strong  race  which  had  retained  the 
attributes  of  real  virile  manhood ;  or  it  would  find  its 
fate  in  a  cataclysm  of  Civil  War  and  Anarchy,  ending  in 
a  Military  Absolutism ! 

All  this  is  on  the  assumption  that  the  effects  of  Social- 
ism would  be  merely  economic.  But  let  the  Collective 
Commonwealth  be  such  as  that  contemplated  by  Marx 
and  his  disciples :  then  religion  would  be  banished  from 
the  earth :  then  the  fear  and  love  of  God  would  be  no 
more;  gone  would  be  the  hope  of  Immortality;  and  not 


332  WHAT   IS    SOCIALISM? 

even  the  sweet  relationship  of  man  and  wife  and  parent 
and  children,  as  now  understood,  would  be  left. 

Yet  Socialism  has  its  good  side,  although  with  charac- 
teristic effrontery  it  appropriates  to  itself  as  its  peculiar 
possession  attributes  and  forces  which  have  been  in 
beneficent  operation  through  the  long  centuries  by  men 
who  never  heard  of  Socialism,  and  by  agencies  which 
have  always  had  the  scorn  and  even  hatred  of  the  great- 
est of  Socialists,  from  Marx  and  Engels  to  Bax  and 
Bebel. 

Nevertheless,  Socialism,  extravagant  and  impracticable 
though  it  be,  has  played  a  great  part  and  is  entitled  to  its 
share  of  credit  in  the  ever  onward  and  upward  move- 
ment, limited  to  no  class,  no  creed,  no  nationality,  no 
theory  of  government  or  economics,  for  the  amelioration 
of  the  lot  of  the  sons  of  toil,  the  righting  of  wrong  wher- 
ever found,  and  the  uplifting  of  the  race  to  higher  planes 
of  life  in  all  its  aspects. 

But,  as  an  universal  condition  of  Society,  as  a  panacea 
for  present  evils,  as  the  hope  of  the  proletariat,  Social- 
ism, in  its  complete  conception,  is  an  absolute  and  a 
hideous  impossibility. 


(finis) 


INDEX 

Aboriginal  Communism,  49,  50. 

Abusiveness  of  Socialists,  20. 

Agrarian  laws  of  Romans,  52. 

Aime,  Victor,  father  of  German  Christian  Socialism,  132. 

Aked,  Rev.,  129. 

Alliance,  Socialist  Trade  and  Labor,  85. 

"Allmend,"  the  Swiss,  61. 

"Alpha  and  Omega"  of  Socialism,  21,  37,  322. 

Altgeld,  Gov.  John  P.,  196. 

American  Federation  of  Labor;  see  Federation  of  Labor. 

American  Institute  of  Christian  Sociology,  129. 

American   Political-Labor  Movements,  75-78. 

American  Railway  Union,  186. 

American  Socialism,  22-30;  history  of,  176-191 ;  State  Socialism, 
111-113;  Christian  Socialism,  127-130;  German-Americans, 
178,  179;  "International,"  179-183;  Socialist  Labor  Party, 
183-186;  Socialist  Party,  186-191 ;  present  outlook,  200-202. 

Anabaptist  Communists,  90. 

Anarchism,  varieties  of,  43;  compared  with  Socialism,  42,  43;  in 
America,  192-200;  see  also  Russian  Socialism. 

Anarchists,  schools  of,  different,  43. 

Ancient  Lowlyl  The,  54,  57"59- 

Ancient  Socialism,  49-63. 

Anglican  Church  and  Socialism,  122,  123. 

Anti-Combination  laws,  68. 

Anti-Socialist  movement,  16,  17,  252-259. 

Atheism  and  Socialism,  127,  128,  189;  Rebel  on,  166;  see  also 
Ethics,  Economics,  Family  and  Religion. 

Athenian  Socialism,  55-59.  91.  3i6. 

Atlantis,  Nnv,  Bacon's,  88. 

Austrian  Socialism,  279-282. 

Aveling,  Dr.,  son-in-law  of  Marx,  279. 

Aztecs,  Communism  among  the,  59. 

1 

Babeuf,  Franqois  Noel,  Communism  of,  275,  276. 

Bacon,  Lord;  his  New  Atlantis,  88. 

Baden-Powell,  B.  IT.;  on  communal  land  ownership,  51. 

Bakounin.  the  Russian  Anarchist,  182,  227,  286,  287.  307. 

Ball,  John;  the  first  English  Socialist,  210-213. 

333 


334  INDEX 

Baptists  and  Socialism,  128,  129. 

Bax,  E.  Belfort;  on  definitions  of  Socialism,  35-41;  his  denun- 
ciation of  Fabianism,  40,  41 ;  on  the  catastrophic  theory, 
158;  on  Socialism  and  marriage,  the  family  and  ethics, 
166-168;  the  will  of  the   majority,  325. 

Beaulieu,  Paul  Leroy;  a  critic  of  Marxism,  274. 

Bebel,  Ferd.  August;  his  definition  of  Socialism,  38;  modification 
of  his  views,  136;  on  French  Commune,  208;  career,  267, 
268. 

Beesley,  Prof.  E.  S.,  226,  230. 

Belgium    Socialism;    Christian,    134;    Revolutionary,   291-294. 

Bellamy's  Looking  Backward,  35,  89,  171 ;  his  "Nationalism,"  89, 
90. 

Berger,  Victor,  first    Socialist  Congressman,  29,   177. 

Bernstein,  a  critic  of  Marxism,  145,  272,  274. 

Besant,  Mrs.  Annie,  Agnostic  and  Socialist,  46,  190,  231,  249,  309. 

Bible,  the,  and  private  property,   51,  52. 

"Bible  of  Socialism,  The,"   137. 

Bismarck;  his  State  Socialism,  36,  102,  103,  271;  coercive  meas- 
ures, 270,  271. 

"Black  Death,"  the,  212. 

Blane,  Louis,  the  first  State  Socialist,  276,  277. 

Blatchford,  Robert ;  his  description  of  ideal  Socialism,  45 ;  his 
fear  of  German  invasion,  230. 

Bliss,  Rev.  Dr. ;  his  definition  of  Socialism,  37 ;  on  Athenian  So- 
cialism, 55,  56;  pioneer  American  Christian  Socialist,  128; 
on  Scientific  Socialism,   140,  143. 

Boitche  dc  Fer,  first  Socialist  paper,  133. 

Bradlaugh,  Charles,  on  Socialism,  5,  231,  321. 

"Brethren  of  the  Common  Life,"  90. 

Briand,  M„  French   Premier,  278,  279. 

Brisbane,  Albert,  a  follower  of  Fourier,  95. 

British  Socialism,  203-259;  Opportunist,  22;  politics  and  Trade 
Unionism,  65-69;  Trades  Disputes  Act,  69,  71,  72;  Labor 
revolt  of  191 1,  72-75;  State  Socialism,  106-110;  Christian 
Socialism,  123-126;  characteristics,  203-207;  its  origin,  207- 
210;  John  Ball,  the  pioneer,  210-213;  tbe  "Industrial  Revo- 
lution," 213-215;  tbe  "Luddites,"  215-217;  the  "Chartists," 
217-223;  the  "International,"  223-227;  "Social  Democratic 
Federation,"  227-236;  "Fabianism,"  236-239;  Independent 
Labor  Party,  239-244;  Labor  Party,  244-248;  Trade 
Unionism  submerged  by  Socialism,  248-252;  has  Social- 
ism   been    halted?    252-256;    the    anti-Socialist    movement, 

2s/>-259. 

"Brook  Farm,"  96. 

"Brotherhood  of  the  Kingdom/'  128,  120. 

Bureau,  1 1 1 « -   International   Socialist,  too,  241),  291,  309. 

Bums,    John,  Labor  member  of  the   Britisb  Cabinet,  231. 


INDEX  335 

Cabet,   £tienne;    his   "Voyage   in    Icaria,"  88,   89;    Utopian   ex- 
periment, 89;   holds  that   Christianity    is  Communism,    [33. 
Campanella's  City  of  the  Sun,  88. 
Capital,    Marx's,  21,  37,   137-139,    M4.    146,   210. 
Capital   under   Socialism,  323. 
Capitalism;    commencement  of,   68,    214;    the    Marxian    view    of, 

I45-I54- 

"Catastrophic  Theory,"  23,  158,  159,  272. 

Catholic  Church  and  Socialism,  59,  90,  121,  122,  130-132,  307- 

Cathrein,   Victor,  Jesuit  critic,  92,  275. 

Chambly,  Comte  de,    133. 

"Chartists,"    123,   208,    217-223. 

Chicago  Anarchists,  i93-*97- 

Christianity  and  Socialism,  58,  127,  128,    133,   134- 

Christian   Sociology,   Institute  of,   129. 

Christian   Social   Union,   125,   128. 

Christian  Socialism,  22,  121-134;  the  churches  and,  121;  in  Eng- 
land, 123-126;  in  America,   127-130;  Continental,  130-134- 

Christian  Socialist  League,  National,   130. 

Christian  Socialists,   Society  of,    128. 

Churches  and  Socialism,   121-123,    126. 

Clarke,  Wm,  on  manager  and  capitalist,   148,   149. 

Classes,  under   Socialism,  45-47. 

"Class  Consciousness,"  22,  25,  27,  29,  68,  73,  74,  77,  177,  185,  200, 

211,   271. 

Clemenceau,  M. ;  his  opinion  of  the  English  working-class,  252. 

Collectivism,  21,  23,  36,  37,  103,  145,  146,  149,  150;  how  will  it  be 
established?  154,  161;  never  a  true  Collectivist  State,  62, 
63,  314;  destructive  to  individualism,  315,  316,  327,  328;  im- 
possibility of  establishing  and   administering,   329-332. 

Combinations;  industrial,  28,  153,  188,  189;  labor,  69. 

Common  lands,  60-62. 

Commons,  Prof.   John  Rogers,  129. 

Communism;  compared  with  Socialism,  42-45;  "the  final  goal  of 
Socialism,"  48;  aboriginal,  49,  50;  Marx  on,  46-48;  in  Ire- 
land, 60,  61. 

Communist  League,  225,  226. 

Communist  Manifesto,  of  Marx  and  Engels,  44,  78,  136,  137,  144. 
148,  161,  165,  225. 

Compensation,  question  of,  45-48,  269,  270. 

Confiscation,  under  Socialism,  109,  157,  158. 

Congressional  grants,  socialistic,   112. 

"Constructive"   Socialism;   see   Fabianism  and   Opportunism. 

"Consumption"  goods,  44,  45. 

Continental    Socialism,  64,  260-306;    Christian,   130-134- 

Co-operation;  Owen's  schemes,  32;  Christian  Socialist,  123-125; 
in  Belgium,  292,  293;  Holland,  295;  Switzerland,  298; 
Denmark,  301. 


336  INDEX 

Co-operative  Commonwealth ;  see  Collectivism. 
Coulanges,   Fustel    de,   refutes    Laveleye's   theories,    51. 

Darwinism  and    Socialism,   315. 

"Davidists,"   90. 

Davidson,  Thomas;  his  relation  to  the  foundation  of  Fabianism, 

237- 
"Death  Duties"    (British),   109,  no. 

Debs,  Eugene  V.,  American  Socialist  leader,  186,  187,  190,  205. 
Definitions  of  Socialism,  34-38. 

De   Leon,   Daniel,   Revolutionary    Socialist   leader,   205. 
Democracy    of   America,    Social,    186. 
Democratic   Federation,   Social    (English),  228-236. 
Democratic  Party,  Social ;   see   Socialist  Party — American. 
Denmark,  co-ownership  in,  61 ;  Socialism  in,  300-302. 
Diderot  on   the  Russian   people,   285. 
Different  Kinds  of  Socialism,  20-22,  34,  35. 
Diocletian,  the  destroyer  of  Solonic  Socialism,  59. 
Distribution  of  Labor's  products;  see  Wages  under  Socialism. 
Dorians,  institutions  of  the,  54. 

Economics,  Socialism   not  limited  to,   161-170. 

"Economic  Determinism";  see  "Materialistic  Conception  of  His- 
tory." 

"Economy,"   Community   of,  99. 

Eight  hours,  179,  194,  197,  232,  242. 

Ely,  Prof.  R.  T.,  on  materialism  of  Socialism,  19,  20;  on  Marx  9 
theory  of  values,  141,  142;  on  Lassalle,  267;  Louis  Blanc's 
failure,   276,  277. 

Engels,  Friedrich,  co-founder  with  Marx  of  Scientific  Socialism; 
compiler  of  Capital,  21,  138,  139;  on  English  Opportunism, 
23,  206;  Communism,  44;  German-American  Socialism,  22, 
23;  gives  credit  to  Marx,  135;  on  Capitalism,  148;  presents 
the   "Marginal    Notes,"   272. 

England,    Municipal    Socialism    in,    114;    "Industrial    Revolution 
in,  213-215;  see  also  British  Socialism. 

England,  Church  of,  and  Socialism,  122-126;  see  also  Christian 
Socialism. 

English  Opportunism;  Enrols  on,  22,  23;  see  also  Fabian  So- 
cialism. 

English   Origin  of  Socialism,  31.  32,  207-210. 

Episcopal  Church,  Protestant,  and  Socialism,  122,  128;  see  also 
Christian   Socialism. 

Equality,  Bellamy's,  89.  . 

Equality  of  remuneration  under  Socialism,  45"4°- 

]■: r furt    Platform,   272. 

Ethics  and  Socialism,  15-20,  38,  161-170,  189.  235,  331- 

Evans,  the  brothers,  75. 

Evolutionary  theory,   135-137- 

Experimental  Utopianism,  90-101. 


INDEX  337 

"Fabian  Essays,"  148  *  Spargo  on,  39,  40. 

Fabian  Socialism,  22,  24,  36,  39,  41,  204,  236-239. 

"Familists,"  90. 

Family,  the;  private  property  and,  50;  under  Socialism,  17,  20, 
50,  51,  161-166,  189,  235,  331. 

Farmers'    Alliance,    77. 

Fauchet,  Claude,   133. 

Federation,  Democratic   (English),  228. 

Federation  of  Lahor  and   Socialism,  42,  78-85. 

Fichte,  Johann  Gottlieb,  early  German  Socialist,  263. 

Finland,   Socialism  in,  290,  291. 

Fischer,  Adolph,  Chicago  Anarchist,  195,  196. 

Flint,  Prof.  Robert,  on  definitions  of  Socialism,  34,  36;  on  Las- 
salle's  Law  of  Wages,  267;  on  individualism  under  So- 
cialism,  327. 

Fourier ;   his   Utopian   schemes,  93-97. 

Frazier,  J.  G.,  on  Athenian  Socialism,  56,  57. 

French  Socialism;  Christian,  133,  134;   Revolutionary,  275-279. 

"Fundamentals,"   the    Marxian,    135-137. 

Gall,  Heinrich  Ludwig,  the  first  German  Socialist,  263. 

Gapon,  Father,  288. 

Garibaldi,  283. 

Gary,  Judge,  on  the  Chicago  Anarchists,   197. 

George,  Henry,  on  Socialism,  17;  his  land  tax  theory,  78,  227. 

German    Labor  Association    (American),   181. 

German  "Marke,"  the,  62. 

Germany,  Socialism  as  a  product  of,  224. 

German  Socialism,  22,  132,  133,  260-275. 

German  State  Socialism,  102-104. 

Gibbons,  John,   LL.D.,   on  private  property,  53. 

Glasier,  J.  Bruce,  editor  of  the  Labor  Leader  (England),  244. 

Gompers,  Samuel,  and  Socialism,  5,  79-81,  85. 

"Gotha   Programme,"  46,   143,   144,  269,  272. 

Grayson,  Victor,  Marxian  M.  P.,  234;  on  private  property  under 

Socialism,  322. 
Greece,  Socialism  in,  306;  see  also  Athenian  Socialism. 
Green,  John   Richard,  on  John   Ball,  211. 
Greenback  Party,  78. 

Guilds,  ancient  trade,  66,  214,  215;  Belgian,  293. 
Guild  of  St.   Matthew,   125,  229. 

Hammurabi,  Code  of,  52,  53. 

Hanna,   Mark,  on  the  coming  conflict,  30. 

Harcourt,    Sir  William,  on  Socialism,  35. 

Hardie,  Keir ;  his  orthodoxy  questioned,  42,  201;  on  Commun- 
ism, 48;  founder  of  Labor  Party,  241,  243,  244;  member  of 
Parliament,  247 ;  on  the  "class  struggle,"  240. 

"Harmonists"    (or  "Harmonites").   32,  94,  98. 


33$  INDEX 

"Haymarket"  Anarchists,   183,   192-197. 

Headlam,  Rev.  Stewart;  founder  of  the  Guild  of  St.  .Matthew, 
231. 

Headley,  F.  W.,  on  the  new  Socialism,  315,  316. 

Hegel,  Georg  Wilhelm,  German  philosopher,  263. 

"Henry  Georgeism,"  78,  227. 

Herron,  Prof.  G.  D.,  129,  130. 

Hertzen,  Alexander;  Russian  Socialist,  285;  his  renunciation  of 
Nihilism,   286,  287. 

Hillquit,  Morris;  his  criticism  of  Samuel  Gompers,  80;  of  the 
Federation  of  Labor,  83-85;  on  Marx's  theory  of  values, 
142,  143;  the  establishment  of  Collectivism.  157;  on  the 
"time-basis"  of  payment,  173-175;  on  Lassalle,  267. 

Holland,  Socialism  in,  294-296. 

Huber,  Victor  Aime ;  social  reformer,  263. 

Huet,  Prof.  Frangois ;  Belgian  Christian  Socialist,   134. 

"Humanitarianism,"  34. 

Human  nature  and   Socialism,  316,   317,  321,   324,   330. 

Hungarian    Socialism,    279-282. 

Hunter,  Robert,  on  Italian  Socialism,  282. 

Hyndman,  Henry  Mayers;  leader  of  British  Marxism,  229,  230, 
233,  234;  preaches  "class  hatred,"  74;  opposes  English 
Labor  Party,  250,  252;  on  conditions  under  Socialism,  327. 

Icarian  Movement,  Cabet's,  88,  89,  97. 

Ideal  Communism,  90-101. 

Impossibility  of  Social  Democracy,  Schaffle's,  282. 

Income  Tax  (British),  109. 

Independent  Labor    Party    (British),  239-244. 

India,  communal  villages  in,  51. 

Individualism,  34;  under  Socialism,  324,  327,  328,  330,  331. 

Individual    rights,   Anarchistic   idea   of,   42. 

Industrial    Commonwealth ;    see    Collectivism. 

"Industrial  Revolution,"  27,  150-161,  213-223. 

Industrial   Trusts;    see    Combinations 

Initiative,  Referendum  and  Recall,  188,  232. 

Institute  of   Giristian   Sociology,    129. 

Insurance,   workmen's,    103-108,    114,    188. 

Insurrectionary  Communism,  24,  25. 

"Insurrection,  the  Welsh,"  221. 

"Intellectual    Opportunists";    see    Fabian    Socialism. 

International  Socialism,  38,  84,  181,   187,  224,  225,  249,  250,  307; 

see  also  Marxian  Socialism, 
"International."  the;  in   America,   179-183;  its  origin,  225-227;  in 

England,  223-227;   the   new,  249,  250,  307-3'0 
Internationalist   Socialist    Bureau,    199..  24Q,   309. 
Internationalist  Socialist    Review;   criticism  of  the  British  Labor 

I'artv,   201,   202. 
Inter-Parliamentary  Committee,  309,  310. 


INDEX  339 

Intolerance  of  Socialists,  20,  192,  245,  324-327. 
Ireland;  ancient  common  property  in,  60;  strike  in,  73;   Social- 
ism in,  203,  248. 
"Iron  Economic  Law,"  Lassalle's,  266,  267. 
Italian  Socialism,  282-284. 

Japan,  Socialism   in,  60. 

Jaures,  Jean  Leon,  a  critic  of  Marx,  274. 

Java,   collective  ownership  in,  62. 

Jesuits,  their  Paraguayan  "reductions,"  90-92. 

Jevons  on  Value,  140. 

Journals,  abusiveness  of  Socialist,  20. 

Kapital,  Das,  Marx's ;  see  Capital. 

Kantsky,  compiler  of  Marx's  works,  21;  on  compromise,  206;  a 
strict  Marxian,  272,  274;  supports  the  English  Labor  Party. 

2S°- 

Kettler,  von,  Bishop,  founder  of  German  Catholic  Christian  So- 
cialism,  132. 

Kingsley,  Charles,  and  the  Chartists,  123-125,  132,  218. 

Kirkup,  Thomas;  his  view  of  values,  144;  on  the  Chartists,  217; 
on  the  "Iron  Law,"  267. 

Knights  of  Labor,  77,  78,  85. 

Labor,  as  the  source  of  wealth,  32,  208,  269;  see  also  Values. 

Labor  and  Socialism,  17,  25-29,  64,  65 ;  see  also  Trade  Unionism. 

Labor  combinations,  69. 

Labor,  Federation  of,  and  Socialism,  78-85. 

Labor,  Knights  of,  77,  78,  85. 

Labor,   Marxian   theory  of;    see  Values. 

Labor  National  Union,  76,  77,  179. 

Labor    platform,    first    American,    76. 

Labor  Party   (English),  243-248,  250,  251. 

Labor  Party.  Independent    (English)   239-244. 

Labor  Party,  Socialist   (American),  183-186. 

Labor- Political  Movement  (American),  75-78;  the  start  in  Eng- 
land, 69. 

Labor  Reform  Party,  180. 

Labor  Representation  (Legislative)  ;  see  Parliamentary  Repre- 
sentation. 

Labor  Representation  Committee  (English),  71,  243,  244. 

Labor  revolt  of  191 1   (English),  72-75- 

Labor   under   serfdom,   68,  69. 

Laborers,  statutes  of,  67-69. 

Lafargue,  M. ;  his  definition  of  Socialism;  his  suicide.  279. 

Lamennais,  Abbe  de,  133. 

Land,  ancient   Communism   in.  51-54.  60-62. 

Land  "Nationalization,"  78;   see  also  State    Socialism. 

Land   Values;   see  "Henry  Georgeism." 


340  INDEX 

Lassalle,  Ferdinand,  "father  of  Social  Democracy,"  264-267. 

Laveleye,  Emile  de;  on  land  ownership,  51;  his  opinion  of 
Huet,   134. 

League,  National   Christian  Socialist,   130. 

"League  of  the  Just,"  224. 

League,  Communist,  225,  226. 

Le  Rossignol,  Prof.;  on  inequality  of  man,  49;  on  Marx's  con- 
ception  of  history,  140. 

Leroux,  Pierre,  and  origin  of  word  "Socialism,"  34. 

Lesseps,  Vicomte  de,  93. 

"Libertines,"    90. 

Liebknecht,  Wilhelm;  on  the  wage  system,  156;  one  of  the 
founders  of  Marxism,  267,  268. 

Lingg,  Louis,  Chicago  Anarchist,  196. 

London   Municipal  Society;   anti-Socialist,  258. 

Los  Angeles  Times,  dynamiting  of,   191,  109,  200. 

Looking   Backward,  by   Bellamy,  89,    171. 

"Luddites,"  the,  215-217. 

Lycurgus,  his  division  of  land,  54. 

McNamara  Outrages,  199,  200. 

McNeill,  George  E. ;  founder  of  the  K.  of  L.  and  A.  F.  L.,  77. 

"Made  in  Germany,"  Socialism  as,  224. 

Magna  Charta,  67. 

Maine,  Sir  Henry;  his  theory  as  to  land  ownership,  51. 

Maison  du  Peuple,  293. 

Majorities  and  Socialism,   325. 

Man,  The,  first  American  Labor  paper,  75. 

Mann,  Tom;  on  solidarity  of  Labor,  74;  leader  of  English  labor 
outbreak,  231. 

"Marke,"  the  German,  62. 

Marriage,  50,  51 ;  see  also  Ethics  and  Religion. 

Marx,  Karl;  "father  of  Modern  Socialism,"  31;  his  definition  of 
Socialism,  36;  author  of  Communist  Manifesto,  43,  44:  and 
of  Capital,  137-139;  on  remuneration  under  Socialism,  46- 
48;  his  theory  of  Surplus  Value,  146;  on  Capitalism,  148; 
on  the  Industrial  Revolution,  150-154;  bis  genius,  208;  on 
the  English  people,  228;  on  Labor  as  the  source  of  wealth, 
269;  his   daughters,  279. 

Marxian  Socialism,  135-175;  in  America,  23;  specifically,  35;  the 
orthodox  kind,  39-42;  neither  Anarchism  nor  Communism, 
42-44;  the  "fundamentals,"  135-137;  evolutionary  theory, 
137;  theory  of  Values,  141-147;  Capitalism,  147-140;  Col- 
lectivism, 149,  150;  the  "Industrial  Revolution,"  150-161  ; 
as  affecting  religion  and  the  family,  [61-166;  involves 
ethics,  166-170;  as  to  reward  of  labor,  170-175. 

"Materialistic  Conception  of  History,"  18-20,  135-137. 

Matthew,   St.   Guild   of,    125. 

Maurice  and  Kingsley ;  Christian  Socialists,  123-125,  218,  222. 


INDEX  341 

Mazzini,  283. 

"Means  of  production,"  38. 

Metric  England,  Blatchford's,  40. 

.Mexico,  Communism  in,  59. 

Middle  Ages,  condition  of  Labor  in  the,  210. 

Mill,  John  Stuart;  his  definition  of  Socialism,  27;  opinion  of 
Fourierism,  96,  97;  how  he  was  affected  by  French  So- 
cialism, 275. 

Milwaukee  elects  a  Socialist  Mayor,  29. 

Miners,  Western  Federation  of,  198;   English  Federation,  249. 

Minimum  wage,  67. 

Minorities,  rights  of,  42. 

"Mir,"  the   Russian,  61,  62,  286. 

Mitchell,  John,  and  "Wage  Slavery,"  70,  80. 

"Modern"  Socialism;  its  beginning,  215;  see  Marxian  Socialism. 

Monarchism  and  Socialism,  299,  303,  306. 

Money  under  Socialism,  45,  175,  323. 

Morality  and  Socialism,  15-20;  161-166,  189,  235,  331;  see  also 
Ethics  and  Religion. 

Morelly,   French    revolutionary   philosopher,   275. 

More's  Utopia,  35,  87. 

Morris,  William,  the  artist-poet  of  Socialism,  40,  41  ;  ridicules 
Marx's  "catastrophic  theory,"  158;  on  John  Ball,  213; 
founder  of  the  Socialist  League,  235 ;  see  also  Bax. 

Moyer-Haywood  murder  case,  197-199. 

Most,  John,  Anarchist,   194. 

Municipal  Socialism,  36,  105;  in  England,  114-119;  see  also  State 
Socialism. 

Municipal  officials,  Socialist,  311. 

Mun,  Comte  de;  Catholic  Christian  Socialist,   133. 

"Nationalism,"  Bellamy's,  89. 

Nationalization  of  railroads,  etc. ;  see  State  Socialism,  and  Col- 
lectivism. 

National   Christian  Socialist  League,   130. 

National  Labor  Union,  76,  77,  179-181. 

National  Reform    Party,    180,   181. 

"National  Workshops"   (French),  276. 

"Needs,  to  each  according  to  his,"  48;  the  Athenian  rule,  55; 
Hillquit  on,   174,    175;   see  also   Compensation. 

Neiv  Atlantis,  by  Lord  Bacon,  88. 

"New  Christianity,"  Saint-Simon,  93. 

"New  Fellowship,"  237. 

"New  Harmony,"  94,  98. 

"New    Trade   Unionism,  The,"  65. 

Newspapers  under  Socialism,  89,  330. 

Niebuhr,  Prof.,  on  agrarian  laws,  52. 

Nieuwenhuis,  Rev.  F.  D.,  founder  of  Dutch  Socialism,  294. 

Nihilism,  Russian,  284,  285. 


342  INDEX 

Norway,   Socialism   in.  302,  303. 

Noyes,  John  Humphrey,   founder  of  the  Oneida  Community,  98. 

O'Connell,  Daniel,  and  the  "Chartists,"  219. 

O'Connor,  Feargus,  leader  of  the  Chartists,  218-222. 

Ohio,  Socialist  gains  in,  191. 

Old-age  pensions;  German,  102,  103;  British,  107,  108;  in  Amer- 
ica,  114,  118. 

Olivier,  Sir  Sidney,  a  Socialist  Governor,  231. 

Oneida  Community,  98-100. 

"Opportunism,"  22,  23,  36,  204;  see  also  Fabian  Socialism. 

Organized  Labor ;  see  Federation  of  Labor,  and  Trade  Union- 
ism. 

Origin  of  the  word  "Socialism,"  34. 

Origin  of  Modern  Socialism,  207-210,  215,  217;  see  also  Robert 
Owen. 

"Orthodox"  Socialism,  19,  39-42. 

"Osborne  decision,"  66. 

Owen,  Robert,  "father  of  Modern  Socialism,"  30-33 ;  pioneer  of 
Utopianism,   93,  94,   215. 

Paraguay,  "reductions"  of,  90-92. 

Parliamentary,  Inter-,  Committee,  309,  310. 

Parliamentary  representation,  28,  29,  71,  177,  243-248,  309-311. 

Parsons,  Albert  R.,  Chicago  Anarchist,  183,  194-196. 

Pauperism,    universal,    under    Socialism,    331. 

Pawnshop,  municipal,  115,  116. 

Pearson,  Prof.  Karl ;  on  offenders  against  the  Socialist  State. 
326. 

"Peasants'  Revolt,"  211-213. 

"People's   Charter";    see    "Chartists." 

"Perfectionists,"  98,  99. 

Pericles,  Socialism  under,  55-57. 

Personal  liberty  under  Socialism,  324-328. 

Peru,   Communism    in,   59. 

"Phalanxes"   of  Fourier,   94-97. 

"Picketing,"  71,  75. 

Plato's   Republic,  35,  86,  87. 

Poland,  291. 

Political-Labor  movement    (American),   75-78. 

Poor  Man's  Guardian;  first  publication  to  use  the  word  "Social- 
ism," 34. 

Populist   Party,  89,   177. 

Portugal,    Socialism    in,   306. 

Postal  Savings  Banks,  112. 

Potash  trade    (German),  socialistic  scheme  as  to,  274,  275. 

Potter,  Beatrice,  on  the  "Chartists,"  219. 

Powderly,  Terence  V.,  85. 


[NDEX  343 

Press,  Socialist;  abusiveness  of,  20,   187,  195;  extent  of,  312;  no 

free,  under  Socialism,  330. 
Primitive  society,  49,  50. 
Private  property  ;  under  Anarchism.   42,  43 ;  the   family  and.  50- 

53;  the  Bible  and,  51;    Proudhon's  declaration  as  to,  277; 

under   Socialism,  322. 
"Production"  goods,  44. 
Proletariat,   the;   in  America,  25,  28;  in  Europe,  27;   in  ancient 

days,  58;  Marx  on,  152,  156 ;  coming  of,  214;  of  the  world, 

309. 
Providential   intervention,   denial  of,    165. 
Protective    tariff,    112. 

Protestant    (German)    Christian   Socialism,    132,    133. 
Protestantism  and  Socialism,  121-123,  126,  128,  211. 
Proudhon,    Pierre   Joseph ;   his   definition    of   Socialism,   35 ;    his 

ideal  society,  277,   278. 
Public  Ownership;  see  State  Socialism,  and  Collectivism. 
Public  utilities,  and  Socialism,  m-120,  319;  see  also  Collectivism, 

and   State   Socialism. 

Quelch,  Henry;  Revolutionary  Socialist,  231,  234,  235. 
Quintessence  of  Socialism,  SchafHe's,  2>7>  2&2- 

Rae,  Prof.,  on  Municipal  Ownership,  114,  115;  Marxian  theory  of 

Values,  145. 
Railroads,  public  and  private  ownership  of,   113,   114. 
Railway   Union,  American,   186. 
"Rappists,"  94,   100,    101. 
"Reductions"  of  Paraguay,  90-92. 
Referendum,  Initiative,  and  Recall,  188,  190,  232 ;  in  Switzerland, 

298;  in  Norway,  303. 
Reform,  Social,  as  distinct  from  Socialism,  78,  132,  294,  320.  321, 

332. 
Religion  and  the   family,    15-20,   161-166,    189,  235,  331;   see  also 

Family. 
Remuneration  under  Socialism,  45-48,  269,  270. 
Representation,  legislative;   see  Parliamentary  representation. 
Republic  of  Plato,  35,  86,  87. 
Republican  Party  and   Socialism,    111,    112. 
"Revisionists,"  272,  296. 
Revolution,  immanence  of,  24,  25. 
Revolutionary  Socialism,  22-25;  see  a'so  Marxian  Socialism,  and 

Collectivism. 
Reybaud  and  the  word  "Socialism,"  34. 
Ricardo;  English  political  economist,   144,  207,  208. 
"Right  to   work,"    102,   103,    189,   204,  276. 
Rodbertus,  Johann    Karl;   pioneer   Socialist,   263.   264 
Rogers,   Thorold;   statistician-economist,   210. 


344  INDEX 

Roman  Agrarian  laws,  52. 

Roman  Catholic  Church  and  Socialism;  see  Catholic  Church. 

Romantic   Socialism,  86-00. 

Roosevelt,  Ex-President,  on  Socialism,  15,  17,  18,  20;  as  a  State 

Socialist,  in;  on  "undesirable  citizens,"  199. 
Rosebery,  Lord,  on  Socialism,  15. 
Russia,  the  "Mir"  in,  61;   Municipal   Socialism  in,  61.   119,    120; 

Revolutionary  Socialism  in,  284-291. 

St.  Matthew,  Guild  of,  125. 

Saint-Simon ;  founder  of  French  Socialism,  92,  93,  133. 

Schaffle,  Dr.;  his  definition  of  Socialism,  27',  on  Surplus  Value, 
147;  on  establishment  of  Collectivism,  157;  as  exponent 
and  critic  of  Socialism,  281,  282. 

Schools,  varying,  of  Socialism,  20-22. 

"Scientific"    Socialism ;    see    Marxian    Socialism. 

Scope  of  Socialism,  18-20. 

Scotland  and   Socialism,  240,  241. 

Sectarian    Communism,   92,   97-101. 

Secular  Utopianism,  92-97. 

"Separatists,"  98. 

Serfdom,  labor  under,  68,  69;  Russian,  285. 

Sexual  relations ;  see  Family. 

Shaftesbury,  Lord,  "the   workingman's   friend,"   31. 

"Shakers,"  98. 

Shaw,  Bernard,  on  the  Marxians,  21,  39;  leader  of  the  Fabians. 
231;  on  Fabianism,  237. 

"Single  tax";  ancient  Japanese  institution,  60;  see  also  "Henry 
Georgeism." 

Skidmore,    Thomas;    his   agrarian   preamble,    176. 

Slavery;  under  Athenian  Socialism,  55,  56,  58,  63;  in  England, 
67-69,  212;  under  Collectivism,  ^27,  328.  330. 

Socialism;  what  is  it?  34-48;  relation  to  religion  and  morality, 
15-20,  161-166,  189,  235,  331:  "purified."  20;  variety  of 
schools  of,  20-22;  one  cardinal  doctrine  of,  21  ;  in  America, 
22-24,  26-30,  176-202;  origin  of  the  word,  34;  Revolu- 
tionary, 24,  25,  42-44;  definitions  "f.  34-38;  orthodox,  39- 
42;  Anarchism,  Communism,  rind.  42-44,  47,  4S ;  ancient. 
49-63;  Athenian,  55-57;  the  "Solonic  Law,"  57-59;  and 
the  Federation  of  Labor,  78-85;  and  Trade  Unionism,  25. 
26,  64-85;  Utopian,  86-101 ;  contrast  between  Rritish  and 
Continental,  131;  Christian.  121-134 ;  Marxian,  I35-I/5; 
State  and  Municipal,  I02-II8,  318;  as  affecting  religion 
and  the  family,  161-166;  ethically,  166-170;  wages  and  dis- 
tribution of  products,  170-175;  English  origin,  207-210;  as 
"made  in  Germany,"  223  225 ;  numerical  strength  of,  310, 
311;  the  press  of.  312;  criticism  of.  314332;  impossibility 
of.  ^20-^22;  a  calamity,  though  possible,  330;  in  America, 
survey   of,    176-202;    in    England.    203-259;    Germany,    260- 


INDEX  345 

275;  France,  275-279;  Austria,  279-282;  Italy,  282-284; 
Russia,  284-291;  Belgium,  291-294;  Holland,  294-296; 
Switzerland,  296-300;  Denmark,  300-302;  Norway,  302, 
303;  Sweden,  303-305;  Spain  and  Portugal,  305,  306;  Sub- 
merges Trade  Unionism  (England),  248-252;  "in  the 
making,"  319,  320;  personal  property  and  capital  under, 
322,  323;  and  the  majority,  325,  326;  individualism  under, 
327,  328;  the  end  of,  328,  329;  the  impossibility  of,  331. 

Social  Democracy  of  America,   186. 

Social  Democratic  Federation   (English),  227-236,  255,  256. 

Social  Democracy  of  Germany,  22,  261-274, 

Social   Party,  the,  181. 

Socialist  Labor   Party    (American),   183-186. 

Socialist   Party   (American),   186-191. 

Solidarity  of  Labor,  73,  74,   180. 

"Solonic  Law,"  57-59. 

Spain,   Socialism  in,  305,   306. 

Spargo,  John;  on  American  Socialism,  22;  his  contempt  for 
Fabianism,  39,  40;  on  remuneration  under  Socialism,  46; 
on  Marx's  theory  of  Values,  142;  the  Gotha  Programme, 
143,  269;  the  establishment  of  Collectivism,  158,  159;  Eng- 
lish origin  of  Socialism,  209,  210;  the  "Iron  Law,"  267. 

Spartan  division  of  land,  54. 

Spies,  August ;  Chicago  Anarchist,  195,   196. 

"State  Capitalism,"  271 ;  see  also  State  Socialism. 

State  Socialism,  36,  102-120;  in  Athens,  56;  defined,  104-107; 
through  taxing  the  rich,  106;  Bismarck  and,  102;  relation 
of  Marxists  to,  103;  German,  36,  102;  British,  36,  106-111; 
American,  ill,  112;  President  Taft  and,  112;  in  New 
Zealand,  113;  in  France;  limitations  of,  105,  106,  317-320; 
see   also   Collectivism. 

"Statutes  of  Laborers,"  67-69,  212. 

Stead,  Alfred,  on  Socialism   in  Japan,  60. 

Stephens,  U.  S.,  founder  of  K.  of  L.  and  A.  F.  of  L.,  78. 

Street  railroads;  comparison  of  American  and  English,  117-119. 

Strikes,  in  England,  26,  72-75;  in  Russia,  288;  in  Belgium,  293; 
in  Sweden,  304;  in  America,  186,  192-194. 

Sun,  City  of  the,  Campanella's,  88. 

Supernatural,  the  denial  of,   165. 

Supreme  Court,  limitation  of  power  of,    190. 

"Surplus  Value,"  145-148,  208,  217;  see  also  Values. 

"Sweated"  labor,  67. 

Sweden,  Socialism   in,  303-305. 

Switzerland,  the  "Allmend"  in,  61 ;  Socialism  in,  296-300. 

"Syndicalism,"  77,,  283. 

"Taff  Vale  Decision,"  26,  69-71,  253. 
Taft,  President,  on  State  Socialism,  112. 
Thorne,  Will,  Socialist  M.  P.,  234. 


346  INDEX 

"Time-basis"  of  payment,  under  Socialism,   173-175. 

Todt,  Pastor,  founder  of  German  Protestant  Christian  Socialism, 

132. 
"Trades  Disputes  Act"  (English),  27.  69,  71,  72,  75. 
Trade  and  Labor  Alliance,   Socialist,  85. 
Trade   Unionism ;   American   compared   with   English,   26,   27 ;   in 

ancient  days,  58,  59;  the  "new,"  65,  66;  and  Socialism,  17, 

25,  64-85,  178,  202,  239,  240,  244,  248-252,  255,  259,  262,  308; 

British,  65-74;  aggregate  of  members  in  the  world,  313. 
Trusts ;  see  Combinations. 
Turkey,    Socialism    in,    306. 
Tyler,  Wat,  leader  of  the  "Peasants'  Revolt,"  212,  213. 

"Ultimate  Aim"  of  Socialism,  273. 

Union,  Christian  Socialist,  125,  128. 

Union,  National  Labor   (American),  76,  77,  179. 

Untermann,  Ernest,  on  the  establishment  of  Collectivism,  155, 
156;  editor  of  Capital,  139. 

Utility  as  the  source  of  Value,  140,  143. 

"Utopia,"   Sir  Thomas   More's,  87. 

Utopian  Socialism,  32,  35,  86-101;  Romantic,  86-90;  Experi- 
mental, 90-101. 

Values,  theory  of,   140-148,  217. 
Vandervelde,   Emil ;    Belgian   Socialist.  309. 
Varieties  of  Socialism,  20-22,  34,  39-42. 
Vaughan,  Rev.  Bernard,  on  Socialism,  223. 
Vebiin,  Prof.  Thorstein  ;  his  view  of  Marxian  Socialism,   135. 
Villages,  communal.  51,  61. 

Villiers,  Brougham,  207,  210;  on  condition  of  English  working- 
class,  215. 
Vincent,   Henry,  the  "Demosthenes  of  Chartism,"   220,  221. 
Vollmer,  George  von,  a  critic  of  Marx,  272. 
"Voyage  in   Icaria,"   Cabet's,  88. 

Wage,  minimum,  67. 

Wages,  under  Socialism,  45-48.  170-175.  269,  270;  in  feudal  times, 

67-69. 
Wagner,  Prof.  Adolph,  on  Rodbertus.  264. 
Ward,  C.  Osborne,  on  ancient  Socialism,  54.  57-59- 
Wealth,  arrogance  of,  in   America,   28;   Labor  as  source  of,  208, 

269,  -70;  State  does  not  produce,  318. 
Webb.  Sidney,  repudiated  by  Bax,  4'  ;  Trade  Union  writer,  231, 

233;  as  to  conditions  under  Socialism,  326 
Weitling,   Wilhelm;   Utopian   Socialist,  264. 
Wills,  11.  (].,  154;  on  different  kinds  of  Socialism,  41;  on  con- 

ditions  under  Socialism,  326. 
"Wei  h  Insurrection,    The."  22L 
Wilson,  VV.  Lawler,  on  Revolutionary  Socialism,  24,  25,  259. 


INDEX 


347 


Women,   Socialist,   203,   235,   274;    in   Finland,   291;   in   Denmark, 

301  ;   anti-Socialist,  259. 
Workmen's     Insurance;     German,     103,     104;     British,     108;     in 

America,   188. 
Workingmen's    College    (London),    124. 
Workingmen's  Party  (American),  76. 

"Zoarites,"  36,   99- 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 

Los  Angeles 

This  book  is  DUE  on  the  last  date  stamped  below. 


ZtVt)  UMJRt 


NOV  *  71968 


DtCl 


Form  l. 9 


UC  SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 


AA    000  404  218 


I 


2 


PLEASE   DO    NOT    REMOVE 
THIS    BOOK  CARD    ! 


.^■LIBRARYQr 


^OJIWDJO^ 


University  Research  Library 


o 


rJ 


I  I 


ill!      1      I 

1  Hill  II Ml 


I 


m 

||   ', 


I 


